A Store Without a Checkout Counter? JCPenney Presses on with Retail Revolution

[donnay]

A Store Without a Checkout Counter? JCPenney Presses on with Retail Revolution

(...)

Johnson explained that physical retailers should be able to do everything an online-only retailer like Amazon does and more—including face-to-face customer service and options such as in-store pickup.

Most noteworthy of all, Johnson announced JCPenney’s plans to completely change the checkout experience at stores. Using advanced Wi-Fi networks, mobile checkout, RFID (radio-frequency identification) tracking systems for goods, and all sorts of self-checkout possibilities, JCPenney will get rid of cashiers, cash registers, and checkout counters, the staples near the exits of virtually every store, as soon as 2014.

“Think of a physical store without a cash rep,” Johnson said. “About 10% of all the money we spend, half a billion dollars a year, goes to transactions. Well that could be done through technology.” The money saved could then be used to help bolster customer service.

Will consumers embrace a cash-less, cashier-less, checkout counter-less store? Investors seem to like the idea. After Johnson’s statements made news, JCPenney’s stock jumped to over $21 per share, after trading for around $19 early on Wednesday.

Continued... (http://moneyland.time.com/2012/07/20/a-store-without-a-checkout-counter-jcpenney-presses-on-with-retail-revolution/?xid=rss-topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+time%2Ftopstories+%28TIME%3A+ Top+Stories%29)

All these nice corporations setting us up for the cashless grid--another UN agenda

[Expatriate]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eob532iEpqk

[moostraks]

Well that will be the last of my shopping with them if they want to go complete self check out. I hope they fail, utterly and completely, as an example of how important a human factor is in retail. I am not one of those who wants a hovering sales associate, but the sterile environment of a tracking system and wireless grid is nauseating. I thought that many of the places that were putting in self checkouts were removing them because of cost factors and lack of use?

[ShaneEnochs]

I'm with moostraks. On top of that, it'll make it so much harder for someone just entering the workforce to find a job. Cashiering jobs are a staple among high school students. Heck, most of my jobs have involved cashiering. I'd hate for stores to make it obsolete in the name of "progress".

[Yieu]

“Think of a physical store without a cash rep,” Johnson said. “About 10% of all the money we spend, half a billion dollars a year, goes to transactions. Well that could be done through technology.” The money saved could then be used to help bolster customer service.

Lets remove the customer service aspect in order to help bolster customer service which would at that point be non-existent?

Customer service means having someone at the register.

[ghengis86]

You don't have to pay automated self-checkout machines minimum wage. Or provide health insurance. Or withhold taxes. Or pay social security taxes. Or pay unemployment fees/taxes/insurance. Or worry about discrimination lawsuits. Or collectively bargain.

The government's mandates incentivize automation and disincentivize hiring people.

[specsaregood]

Lets remove the customer service aspect in order to help bolster customer service which would at that point be non-existent?

Customer service means having someone at the register.
No it doesn't. They could alternately staff the men's clothing areas with women willing to help you pick out a better outfit, prop up your ego and keep you from getting stuff that doesn't "match". That would be one example of improving customer service without staffing checkouts.

[madengr]

I'd rather go in the store, get what I need, and leave. I hate hovering sales people.

Why preserve a menial job of running items over a scanner and bagging them? Used to be they had to type in the price. Soon all items in your cart will be instanly tallied via RFID, which is allot better than removing them all, scanning them, then putting them back in. Sounds like buggy whip manufacturing preservation.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to Amazon's local delivery.

[donnay]

I'd rather go in the store, get what I need, and leave. I hate hovering sales people.

Why preserve a menial job of running items over a scanner and bagging them? Used to be they had to type in the price. Soon all items in your cart will be instanly tallied via RFID, which is allot better than removing them all, scanning them, then putting them back in. Sounds like buggy whip manufacturing preservation.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to Amazon's local delivery.


That menial job may put food on someone's table.

[ShaneEnochs]

That menial job may put food on someone's table.

It did mine for several years.

[Yieu]

No it doesn't. They could alternately staff the men's clothing areas with women willing to help you pick out a better outfit, prop up your ego and keep you from getting stuff that doesn't "match". That would be one example of improving customer service without staffing checkouts.

A female employee helped me pick out a suit a JCPenney when I knew nothing about suits; she made sure it was something that fit well and she knew how to fit it by eye, and even found one at a discount. Then she rang up the items at the register. That's greater customer service to me, and they're offering it now at some stores it seems. Good customer service is often more a service offered by the individual than the company, because not everyone knows it well.

[Cowlesy]

No it doesn't. They could alternately staff the men's clothing areas with women willing to help you pick out a better outfit, prop up your ego and keep you from getting stuff that doesn't "match". That would be one example of improving customer service without staffing checkouts.

So crazy, it might just work. You should send that one to Bill Ackman.

[Yieu]

So crazy, it might just work. You should send that one to Bill Ackman.

Read above. ;) It seems they don't need to lower customer service in other areas to achieve this.

[specsaregood]

A female employee helped me pick out a suit a JCPenney when I knew nothing about suits; she made sure it was something that fit well and she knew how to fit it by eye, and even found one at a discount. Then she rang up the items at the register. That's greater customer service to me, and they're offering it now at some stores it seems. Good customer service is often more a service offered by the individual than the company, because not everyone knows it well.

That's good to know. But actually ringing up the suit was not the good customer service part of the experience was it?

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

That menial job may put food on someone's table.

Right, let's all make our lives less convenient for the sake of an antiquated 'job'. Of course that job would put food on the table, but so will that same money they are shifting into more customer service. Money isn't just lost when a certain job or industry ceases to exist. This is why protectionists do not understand any economics whatsoever.

[Yieu]

That's good to know. But actually ringing up the suit was not the good customer service part of the experience was it?

It is more attentive than leaving you to automation, and it was appreciated.

[angelatc]

No it doesn't. They could alternately staff the men's clothing areas with women willing to help you pick out a better outfit, prop up your ego and keep you from getting stuff that doesn't "match". That would be one example of improving customer service without staffing checkouts.

Yes, but does anybody actually think that will happen? Or it it does...will it last? I think the arguments about the poor high school students is misguided - people always say automation will drive people out of work but the cotton gin didn't wipe out cotton production. Nor did robotics pare down the size of the auto workers union. But there's no way I'll believe that Penney's is going to take the money they're saving in cashier costs and invest it in people who departmentally specialize.

[specsaregood]

It is more attentive than leaving you to automation, and it was appreciated.

Well, it doesn't sound like they want to leave you to automation like self-serve checkouts; but make it so there is no "checking out" to do other than shake the helpful young lady's hand and thank her right before leaving with your suit. sounds nice to me. eg: make it so the focus of the staffs job is to make sure you have a good experience rather than the focus being on manually ringing up prices. that just sounds archaic. :)

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Yes, but does anybody actually think that will happen? Or it it does...will it last? I think the arguments about the poor high school students is misguided - people always say automation will drive people out of work but the cotton gin didn't wipe out cotton production. Nor did robotics pare down the size of the auto workers union. But there's no way I'll believe that Penney's is going to take the money they're saving in cashier costs and invest it in people who departmentally specialize.

Right, but even if they don't that money is going to go somewhere. I doubt JCPennies is just going to go all Scrooge McDuck on us, considering money's only usefulness is when it is actively being exchanged. Fiat money in particular has very little use otherwise -- maybe toilet paper, or fire starting material.

[angelatc]

Why preserve a menial job of running items over a scanner and bagging them? Used to be they had to type in the price. Soon all items in your cart will be instanly tallied via RFID, which is allot better than removing them all, scanning them, then putting them back in. Sounds like buggy whip manufacturing preservation.

That's exactly what it is. People might as well be digging ditches and filling them back in.

[moostraks]

That's good to know. But actually ringing up the suit was not the good customer service part of the experience was it?

For me the sales portion is. I don't need a hovering sales associate to assist me in shopping. I do not want to be "tracked" while I am shopping like some criminal looking to flee with their goods. I want to pay with cash and not have a machine screaming because its scanners cannot process them. So, I am not interested in this so called advancement in customer service and my dollars will do the talking because I have been a loyal JCP customer who purchases in large quantites and they can try to replace my sales with several other folks...

[specsaregood]

Yes, but does anybody actually think that will happen? Or it it does...will it last? I think the arguments about the poor high school students is misguided - people always say automation will drive people out of work but the cotton gin didn't wipe out cotton production. Nor did robotics pare down the size of the auto workers union. But there's no way I'll believe that Penney's is going to take the money they're saving in cashier costs and invest it in people who departmentally specialize.

Well that is a fair enough point. But that's why I'm the ideas guy, not the accountant. An epic, eternal battle is my understanding.

[angelatc]

Right, but even if they don't that money is going to go somewhere. I doubt JCPennies is just going to go all Scrooge McDuck on us, considering money's only usefulness is when it is actively being exchanged. Fiat money in particular has very little use otherwise -- maybe toilet paper, or fire starting material.

Yes, you're right about that. I'm just not gifted enough to predict where will go. I am however, fairly skilled at predicting where it won't go. And I just don't think that Penney's is going to eliminate the model and replace it with a boutique atmosphere. Although they might. They've never pursued the Walmart crowd, so maybe they're going to upscale.

It will be interesting.


ETA: LOL - Specsaregood.....we posted at the same time. :)

[MelissaWV]

JCP and a lot of the old mall anchor stores are struggling; this is probably a last-gasp effort to come up with the next big thing and stay afloat.

Self-check has been quietly withdrawn from a lot of places. The big hiccup with those aisles is that you can very easily cheat the system. Organic miniature Japanese eggplant? Oh I "mistakenly" rang those up as their big cheap cousin. Pretty much most expensive produce was being rung up as 4011. You can do a tag swap on meat and ring up that expensive steak as chicken leg quarters. The people who are supposed to be on the lookout for such things are invariably helping some little old lady who cannot read the screen and has locked up the aisle.

This? I can absolutely see people developing RFID-proof bags that they bring in, unroll in the dressing rooms, and stuff their "purchase" into. I also cannot see how they would be able to roll out this system for everyone's purchase. What is most likely is that they would do this as a "courtesy" for JCP card members, or something similar, and then just leave one or two associates in the whole store who can ring people up the old-fashioned way. There is no way JCP would know which card in my wallet I want to use, or to validate my credit card purchase (which would make it easy as pie for me to claim "fraud" after a big shopping spree). Linking it to a rewards card or a credit card, though, would allow them to "swipe" my agreed method of payment every time I leave with a purchase. Some people will go for that. Many won't.

[Seth]

That menial job may put food on someone's table.

Can't believe I am hearing this on a Ron Paul forum. You would think people here would understand that technology shouldn't be held back for the sake of preserving people's jobs. Hell, there is even a whole chapter about this in Economics in One Lesson.

[MelissaWV]

Can't believe I am hearing this on a Ron Paul forum. You would think people here would understand that technology shouldn't be held back for the sake of preserving people's jobs. Hell, there is even a whole chapter about this in Economics in One Lesson.

Or that demand should be ignored to artificially preserve a job. If people don't want to deal with cashiers, then the option will arise, and there will be fewer cashiers. I still don't see them disappearing entirely, though.

[angelatc]

Or that demand should be ignored to artificially preserve a job. If people don't want to deal with cashiers, then the option will arise, and there will be fewer cashiers. I still don't see them disappearing entirely, though.

Nor do I. I was thinking about the evolution of the department store cashier. If I have this right, in the beginning, each department had its own registers. Some departments may have had two or three. It's been a long time, but I do remember hearing, "No, I can't ring that up here. You have to take it back over to that department."

That seemed to segue into either having a set of cashiers at the exits, or cashier "boxes" in the middle of several departments. In the latter model, the cashiers didn't tend to stay at their station awaiting people ready to complete their purchases. Most of the time they would be out on the floor, stocking, restocking, straightening, cleaning. It isn't uncommon to walk up to a cashier box and wonder how long it will take for an employee to appear.

I am guessing, at least in the short term, that that box is going away, and the staffers will simply scan your items where you're standing. Not sure how the logistics will pan out though. Thinking of clothing - the cashier box also serves as a flat surface to fold on, as well as a place to stash bags and the hangers that are removed.

I'm not going to condemn it until I see what they're going to do with it.

[TheTexan]

That menial job may put food on someone's table.

Same rationale is used to justify keeping government jobs :/

[madengr]

Let's just get rid of barcodes to preserve jobs. I'm old enough to remember grocery shopping back in those days. Someone had to go around with a sticker gun and label every single item, then when the price changed they did it all over again, so each item had a layer of stickers. Then every day they would have to do an inventory of all those cans so they knew what needed ordering. Then when you checked out, they had to type in each item on the register, often screwing it up.

Now they just have to scan the barcode, and everything else is automated. At least back then the teenager could identify the produce. Now you have to tell them what it is. I prefer the self checkout.

Maybe the high schools are not preparing students for jobs these days. I took votech electronics 4 hrs/day for the last two years of high school, working summers at a factory. It was mostly shit work no one else wanted to do, but they ocassional let me tear down pumps, wire control panels, and touch other expensive things, which was allot more intellectually stimulating than bagging groceries.

[specsaregood]

Let's just get rid of barcodes to preserve jobs. I'm old enough to remember grocery shopping back in those days. Someone had to go around with a sticker gun and label every single item, then when the price changed they did it all over again, so each item had a layer of stickers. Then every day they would have to do an inventory of all those cans so they knew what needed ordering. Then when you checked out, they had to type in each item on the register, often screwing it up.

Now they just have to scan the barcode, and everything else is automated. At least back then the teenager could identify the produce. Now you have to tell them what it is. I prefer the self checkout.

I remember putting on those stickers. I also remember manning the register when inevitably an item would come up with no price tag -- I also recall debating wait 10 minutes for somebody to do a price check or just making up a price and asking the customer if they agreed to it.

[malkusm]

That menial job may put food on someone's table.

Bring back the horse-drawn carriage manufacturing jobs!

[jkr]

they are ALLL of y0Ur j()bz

they are robots

we are being replaced one corner or edge of human action one industry at a tyme

[angelatc]

Let's just get rid of barcodes to preserve jobs. I'm old enough to remember grocery shopping back in those days. Someone had to go around with a sticker gun and label every single item, then when the price changed they did it all over again, so each item had a layer of stickers.

Believe it or not, I think 2011 was the first year that Michigan allowed retailers to do away with those stickers. And the liberals wailed.

[brandon]

All these nice corporations setting us up for the cashless grid--another UN agenda


http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/184/961/tumblr_lnvvueuSsj1qcj56b.png?1318394475

[brandon]

No it doesn't. They could alternately staff the men's clothing areas with women willing to help you pick out a better outfit, prop up your ego and keep you from getting stuff that doesn't "match". That would be one example of improving customer service without staffing checkouts.

Usually gay guys are a lot better at men's fashion than women. Never let a woman dress you.

[specsaregood]

Usually gay guys are a lot better at men's fashion than women. Never let a woman dress you.

Dunno about that. Maybe if you want to attract men.

Edit: and never let a woman dress you? lol, I consider not having to clothes shop for myself or dress myself a check in the "plus" column when deciding to marry.

[Guitarzan]

I'm with moostraks. On top of that, it'll make it so much harder for someone just entering the workforce to find a job. Cashiering jobs are a staple among high school students. Heck, most of my jobs have involved cashiering. I'd hate for stores to make it obsolete in the name of "progress".


And years ago you would've been one arguing against this new technology called the 'automobile' in the name of the horse carriage drivers that would be losing their jobs...

[angelatc]

Dunno about that. Maybe if you want to attract men.

Edit: and never let a woman dress you? lol, I consider not having to clothes shop for myself or dress myself a check in the "plus" column when deciding to marry.

I think if you're going for metrosexual trendy then the gay guys are probably the best, but as for a conservative suit....I think that straight men who sell suits are a better choice, precisely because they're less likely to lean towards the trendy.

[nobody's_hero]

If this turns to be anything like those damned self-checkout lines, count me out.

"Please place the item in the bag."

Okay. *Nobody's Hero places item in the bag.*

"Sorry. Please place item in the bag."

*Picks up item and puts it back down in the bag.*

"Please ask for assistance."

FFS. If there'd been a real person here I could have already been out the door, and they'd have put the item in the bag for me.

[nobody's_hero]

It is sad, though. I thought the only jobs they couldn't outsource were retail jobs, and I was right. But I forgot those jobs can be automated.

I imagine the day will come when we will all use robots to interact with one another, like avatars.

And I hope I won't live to see that day.

[madengr]

They were bad at first, however, have gotten better over the years. If you do it correctly, let's say at Home Depot, you can't place (in the bagging area) a gallon jug of toilet cleaner, followed by a bag of washers. Do it the other way around at it will be fine. Sometimes you can't even bag the washers.

Contrast this to teenage grocery baggers that bag leaky raw chicken with your fruit, or don't put all the frozen stuff in one bag when it's 100 degrees out, or they are unsure of what to do with that paper bag with the picture of the penguin on it. Have a blank stare when faced with collard or mustard greens, or Swiss chard. Can't tell the difference between a jalapeño and a cayenne pepper.

[Danan]

Sounds interesting. Standing in a long line, waiting for seniors to find the right cash in their pockets while kids are crying behind you, having to pack your groceries (we don't have any "packers" here...) while simultaneously the cashier asks you to pay and annoyed people waiting for you to hurry up... - this really sucks. I hate it.

We have the technology for better payment systems, we should use it. One could "check in" at the entrance with his smartphone and "pay" by checking out at the exit without all the unnecessary trouble. At least as an optional choice for now, since especially older folks are likely to have some problems with this model.

I believe this technology (or a similar one) is already used successfully in Japan. At least that's what a friend told me, I haven't checked that myself. I hope that catches on where I live.


And the argument we shouldn't want that because it "destroys jobs" is completely stupid as many people here already pointed out. This is in no way a position anyone fighting for liberty or who understands economics could hold. Some people seem to love the idea of living in a medieval, static "fair price theory"-environment. Only the overcoming of this ancient sentiment made it possible for the ideas of property rights and voluntary contract rights to succeed and therefore for humanity to progress. This is what has built the foundation of liberty.

I'm completely fine with it if you don't like such a form of payment-system out of any other reason, to make that clear. Let the free market sort that out.

[invisible]

Unless I'm ordering something online because I can't buy it locally, I refuse to do business with machines. I'll pay cash at the register, thanks.

I've seen very few people actually use these "self checkouts". I hate that stores have 8 of those things sitting around idle for the most part, and have 12 cashier stations manned by two cashiers while 40 people stand around in line. Of course, not only do stores not put prices on the individual items anymore, but cashiers aren't even taught how to ring prices into a register anymore. Whenever someone has an item that won't scan or doesn't have a barcode sticker on it, the entire line gets held up while a supervisor is called over. Then you have the cashiers who ring up your sale and just stand there like a moron until you prompt them with "how much is it?", and they point to a screen. My response to that is, "I asked you, not the machine". This is service? This is progress?

[specsaregood]

//

[KingRobbStark]

That menial job may put food on someone's table.

The market will find a solution.

[madengr]

So what ever happened with the grocer union vs. Albertsons a few years ago in CA?

[specsaregood]

The market will find a solution.

So far the market's solution seems to be to give them government jobs.

[Nickels]

Somebody hates efficiency and unemployment. Doesn't he know that destroying computers will give everybody jobs? hasn't he heard of "broken window fallacy"?

[MelissaWV]

Sounds interesting. Standing in a long line, waiting for seniors to find the right cash in their pockets while kids are crying behind you, having to pack your groceries (we don't have any "packers" here...) while simultaneously the cashier asks you to pay and annoyed people waiting for you to hurry up... - this really sucks. I hate it.

We have the technology for better payment systems, we should use it. One could "check in" at the entrance with his smartphone and "pay" by checking out at the exit without all the unnecessary trouble. At least as an optional choice for now, since especially older folks are likely to have some problems with this model.

I believe this technology (or a similar one) is already used successfully in Japan. At least that's what a friend told me, I haven't checked that myself. I hope that catches on where I live.
...

Using Japan as your model for innovation might not be a great idea. They have automated everything, oven just for the novelty of it. They also have a "theme park" for just about anything you can think of. I won't go into details; that's what the internet is for.

The problems you pointed out above do not happen at every grocery store, or even a majority of them. Part of the problem with the cashiers is a lack of training. It really also does not matter what produce you pick up, so long as it has the sticker on it. That's the PLU she's going to key in. The bigger problem consumers don't seem to notice is that cashiers do not use the "tare" key anymore. You are now paying for the plastic bag those bananas are in.

You can always shop elsewhere, and yes that includes places with automatic checkout or self checkout. The problems there go far beyond $1 worth of cracked eggs, though. Automatically paying for things doesn't always jive very well with the consumer's budget. I don't have a Smart Phone. I prefer to pay cash. There are people at the other end of the extreme who long for the day that an RFID chip will just tally up their purchases and relieve them of their paycheck automatically.

[Nickels]

That menial job may put food on someone's table.

So would using a typewriter or waiting tables, but what happens when people stop eating out or don't use paper anymore? Tough luck, that's just life, nobody owes you a job.

[donnay]

The market will find a solution.

Not as it stands now. Government intervention/regulations throughout history have been the leading factor of people starving in a country.

[Nickels]

So far the market's solution seems to be to give them government jobs.

sadly, that seems to be the short term solution, to find people jobs at tax payer expense or debt. And while that, people don't seem to be cutting their spending which leads to continual propping of the housing and tuition market.

[Nickels]

Not as it stands now. Government intervention/regulations throughout history have been the leading factor of people starving in a country.

He said market will find a solution, who said anything about government regulation?

[donnay]

So would using a typewriter or waiting tables, but what happens when people stop eating out or don't use paper anymore? Tough luck, that's just life, nobody owes you a job.

How did you get what I said that someone owes me a job? It's up to me to find a job, but what happens when there are no jobs available? That was sort of my point. That is why the illusion of free market has so many people duped. What we have today is no free market, it is the appearance, the illusion, of one.

[donnay]

He said market will find a solution, who said anything about government regulation?

LOL! How does the market find a solution when government is involved? A free market means the regulators would be the people not the government. You are not free to open up a business and sell things right out of your house until you get a permit. A permit means the government/State gives you permission to be in business.

[Nickels]

How did you get what I said that someone owes me a job? It's up to me to find a job, but what happens when there are no jobs available? That was sort of my point. That is why the illusion of free market has so many people duped. What we have today is no free market, it is the appearance, the illusion, of one.

If nobody owes you a job, what is the point of you complaining that there are none available? Where did you get the idea that free market equals jobs don't disappear or everybody has a job at all times? Ever heard of "job creation"? Oh, I don't mean government dumping money for you to be their task monkey, I mean finding things you can do and begging for money in return for it (ie, getting creative to solve other people's problems). I don't care what you call today's system, facts do not change that you are not entitled to a job, and the government didn't force you to not have one either.

[puppetmaster]

You don't have to pay automated self-checkout machines minimum wage. Or provide health insurance. Or withhold taxes. Or pay social security taxes. Or pay unemployment fees/taxes/insurance. Or worry about discrimination lawsuits. Or collectively bargain.

The government's mandates incentivize automation and disincentivize hiring people.

yep!

[Nickels]

LOL! How does the market find a solution when government is involved? A free market means the regulators would be the people not the government. You are not free to open up a business and sell things right out of your house until you get a permit. A permit means the government/State gives you permission to be in business.

I never said government, who said that word? Fair enough that there are actually lots of regulations as to where and how you can sell things, and that's mostly due to taxation and liability. However, these are not any new laws that just started yesterday, they've been in place for years if not decades, and have more than enough time to adjust to, work around. You do not need a permit to sell things online, or by craigslist, but you're expect to report your income if it's enough to matter.

[Nickels]

yep!

So basically government causes or encourages unemployment. Is that saying the government is good because it causes unemployment? or bad?

[PaulConventionWV]

A Store Without a Checkout Counter? JCPenney Presses on with Retail Revolution

(...)

Johnson explained that physical retailers should be able to do everything an online-only retailer like Amazon does and more—including face-to-face customer service and options such as in-store pickup.

Most noteworthy of all, Johnson announced JCPenney’s plans to completely change the checkout experience at stores. Using advanced Wi-Fi networks, mobile checkout, RFID (radio-frequency identification) tracking systems for goods, and all sorts of self-checkout possibilities, JCPenney will get rid of cashiers, cash registers, and checkout counters, the staples near the exits of virtually every store, as soon as 2014.

“Think of a physical store without a cash rep,” Johnson said. “About 10% of all the money we spend, half a billion dollars a year, goes to transactions. Well that could be done through technology.” The money saved could then be used to help bolster customer service.

Will consumers embrace a cash-less, cashier-less, checkout counter-less store? Investors seem to like the idea. After Johnson’s statements made news, JCPenney’s stock jumped to over $21 per share, after trading for around $19 early on Wednesday.

Continued... (http://moneyland.time.com/2012/07/20/a-store-without-a-checkout-counter-jcpenney-presses-on-with-retail-revolution/?xid=rss-topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+time%2Ftopstories+%28TIME%3A+ Top+Stories%29)

All these nice corporations setting us up for the cashless grid--another UN agenda

How are you going to bolster customer service when the customers never get to see a live human being?

[Nickels]

How are you going to bolster customer service when the customers never get to see a live human being?

just because you don't have a counter doesn't mean you can't have a customer service person on site, the point of this argument was, that if you saved money on cashiers you can put more into customer service. But that's a POSSIBILITY, no guarantee that saved money will always be spent the way consumers want it (which is saving on purchases, or better service), although there's lots of incentive to do that (such as stay competitive, or do more business).

[MelissaWV]

How are you going to bolster customer service when the customers never get to see a live human being?

I have had more fulfilling and useful customer service experiences online than I have in person. Usually by the time I need help with an item, it's time to return it, or I was overcharged, etc., and these are all things you notice once you leave the stores. Questions like "where's the bathroom?" and "how much is this?" can be resolved with kiosks, and in many stores they already are.

[donnay]

If nobody owes you a job, what is the point of you complaining that there are none available? Where did you get the idea that free market equals jobs don't disappear or everybody has a job at all times? Ever heard of "job creation"? Oh, I don't mean government dumping money for you to be their task monkey, I mean finding things you can do and begging for money in return for it (ie, getting creative to solve other people's problems). I don't care what you call today's system, facts do not change that you are not entitled to a job, and the government didn't force you to not have one either.

The country of which many of us were born into and accustom to is; you are born, you go to school, you graduate school and possibly go to college and get a job. I am not saying it is right. What I am saying is that we were born into a system which require for people to be able to buy a home, buy a car and put food on the table to have a J.O.B. Without a J.O.B. you cannot use the useless FRN to buy the things you need to survive--get it?

The illusion that we have a free market is laughable at best. This country no more has a free market than China does. Both countries are regulated by their government, which makes each set of people beholden to government to survive. If we had a truly free market, the government would only step in, insofar as, if a product or business injured a person or persons.

Frankly, I would be ecstatic if government were completely out of the picture with regards to the economy. But the Marxist/Leninist had taken over a long time ago and have been able to perpetuate an illusion of free market. Just check out the Communist Manifesto, if you do not believe me.

[Nickels]

I have had more fulfilling and useful customer service experiences online than I have in person. Usually by the time I need help with an item, it's time to return it, or I was overcharged, etc., and these are all things you notice once you leave the stores. Questions like "where's the bathroom?" and "how much is this?" can be resolved with kiosks, and in many stores they already are.

I agree with you, lots of "customer service" questions are quick and easy. It's when you can delegate "worthy" questions that make the expereine for those who need it, much better. But hey, maybe the market just values smiles and faces for no other reasons :)

[Nickels]

The country of which many of us were born into and accustom to is; you are born, you go to school, you graduate school and possibly go to college and get a job. I am not saying it is right. What I am saying is that we were born into a system which require for people to be able to buy a home, buy a car and put food on the table to have a J.O.B. Without a J.O.B. you cannot use the useless FRN to buy the things you need to survive--get it?


I'm with you on that, our culture has duped us. I'm above it, are you? Or are you going to keep complaining for the losers?



The illusion that we have a free market is laughable at best. This country no more has a free market than China does.


So that must mean living conditions are equally as good in both countries?



Both countries are regulated by their government, which makes each set of people beholden to government to survive.


Ok, so what country is NOT regulated by their government? Can you tell me? Or more importantly, can you tell which country is wealthier or preferable to live as a result of "lacking regulation"?



If we had a truly free market, the government would only step in, insofar as, if a product or business injured a person or persons.


Not interested in your speculative "If we had a truly Scotsman utopia", give me a solid example if you can.




Frankly, I would be ecstatic if government were completely out of the picture with regards to the economy. But the Marxist/Leninist had taken over a long time ago and have been able to perpetuate an illusion of free market. Just check out the Communist Manifesto, if you do not believe me.

so this country was wrong how long ago?

[angelatc]

Not as it stands now. Government intervention/regulations throughout history have been the leading factor of people starving in a country.

I might be wrong, but I don't think JCP's cashiers are being forced out of business by government regulation alone. Of course the high cost of payroll is certainly a factor, but technology is the key to alleviating that.

[silverhandorder]

I love anything that saves me time and voluntary. I can choose to shop in stores like this while you boycott them.

[Nickels]

I might be wrong, but I don't think JCP's cashiers are being forced out of business by government regulation alone. Of course the high cost of payroll is certainly a factor, but technology is the key to alleviating that.

I'm starting to wonder, in this guy's mind, what IS NOT to blame the government for.

[Nickels]

I love anything that saves me time and voluntary. I can choose to shop in stores like this while you boycott them.

I am all for saving time and resources, but I also want to save money & labor as a result.

For example, I won't "go green" for a Kindle book if it only saves me $1. Unless I make $10 per hour and waiting on delivery will really cost me more than that.

[alucard13mmfmj]

probably easy to exploit the system and shoplift.

[angelatc]

I love anything that saves me time and voluntary. I can choose to shop in stores like this while you boycott them.

Yep. My husband hates the self-scanners. I love them. The only time I don't use them is when I have so much stuff it won't all fit on the carousel.

For a while, Jewel Osco had thumb scanners tied to your checking account. That meant I could ride my bike to the store without carrying a purse or even a card. I knew the privacy implications, but it was worth it to me.

[MelissaWV]

I am all for saving time and resources, but I also want to save money & labor as a result.

For example, I won't "go green" for a Kindle book if it only saves me $1. Unless I make $10 per hour and waiting on delivery will really cost me more than that.

Off-topic, but the main reason I use my Kindle is to save space. Buying paperbacks, having them delivered, dealing with the boxes, getting rid of the ones I don't want anymore, and storing the ones I might want to reread... is worth paying even the same price for an eBook to me.

[Nickels]

Yep. My husband hates the self-scanners. I love them. The only time I don't use them is when I have so much stuff it won't all fit on the carousel.

For a while, Jewel Osco had thumb scanners tied to your checking account. That meant I could ride my bike to the store without carrying a purse or even a card. I knew the privacy implications, but it was worth it to me.

nice!!

[angelatc]

I'm starting to wonder, in this guy's mind, what IS NOT to blame the government for.

I'm actually fine with blaming the government for everything. But when you run a business....payroll sucks. It's expensive and takes up far more capital than it should, no thanks to government rules and regulations.

Since it's the highest cost (aside from inventory, one would assume), the market naturally seeks ways to lower it.

If we had a totally free market, and the labor market overheated from all that freedom....the result would be the same. Wages would rise, and the market would seek to lower those costs.

[Nickels]

Off-topic, but the main reason I use my Kindle is to save space. Buying paperbacks, having them delivered, dealing with the boxes, getting rid of the ones I don't want anymore, and storing the ones I might want to reread... is worth paying even the same price for an eBook to me.

Not off topic at all. I totally see your point, you obviously value things differently than me.

I believe having the paper book gives me the freedom to resell or give away the book later when I don't want it. (most likely you will give it away because it's worth close to a buck by then).

[Muwahid]

Not having cashiers doesn't mean a loss in jobs, there has to be more professionals behind the scenes making sure the technology works, and it's higher paying. Anyone who believes in a free market wont argue that you shouldn't do 'x' because people will lose jobs, in fact more innovation usually means more opportunities in the future

[donnay]

How are you going to bolster customer service when the customers never get to see a live human being?

You talking to me? I am not bolstering this plan. I am making people aware that these agendas will help promote the cashless society grid agenda.

[Nickels]

I'm actually fine with blaming the government for everything. But when you run a business....payroll sucks. It's expensive and takes up far more capital than it should, no thanks to government rules and regulations.

Since it's the highest cost (aside from inventory, one would assume), the market naturally seeks ways to lower it.

If we had a totally free market, and the labor market overheated from all that freedom....the result would be the same. Wages would rise, and the market would seek to lower those costs.

I apologize for my ignorance.

But what do you mean "payroll sucks and costs too much"? Is it the taxes itself that take away capital from employees? Or the cost of preparing them? And if the latter, don't they only get complicated based on how many employees/expenses you have (which by that time, it's balanced with revenue)?

[PaulConventionWV]

I have had more fulfilling and useful customer service experiences online than I have in person. Usually by the time I need help with an item, it's time to return it, or I was overcharged, etc., and these are all things you notice once you leave the stores. Questions like "where's the bathroom?" and "how much is this?" can be resolved with kiosks, and in many stores they already are.

I don't know about you, but going to a store and NOT having to deal with people would make me quite depressed.

[Nickels]

You talking to me? I am not bolstering this plan. I am making people aware that these agendas will help promote the cashless society grid agenda.

Cashless grid means CONVENIENCE for people, it may also mean convenience for theives too, convenience is always the enemy of safety, that is a law of nature everybody is aware of.

Do you subscribe to that old "mark of the beast" conspiracy you read in Revelation?

[Nickels]

I don't know about you, but going to a store and NOT having to deal with people would make me quite depressed.

wow. well, I guess you need more friends then :)

[Nickels]

Not having cashiers doesn't mean a loss in jobs, there has to be more professionals behind the scenes making sure the technology works, and it's higher paying. Anyone who believes in a free market wont argue that you shouldn't do 'x' because people will lose jobs, in fact more innovation usually means more opportunities in the future

it still means a lowered cost for the merchant, or else they'd not do it. And whatever it is, whether to save money or save time, it comes at a price they are willing to pay. A job and an expense doesn't disappear into thin air without a trace, or if it does, it deserves to.

[PaulConventionWV]

I'm with you on that, our culture has duped us. I'm above it, are you? Or are you going to keep complaining for the losers?



So that must mean living conditions are equally as good in both countries?



Ok, so what country is NOT regulated by their government? Can you tell me? Or more importantly, can you tell which country is wealthier or preferable to live as a result of "lacking regulation"?



Not interested in your speculative "If we had a truly Scotsman utopia", give me a solid example if you can.




so this country was wrong how long ago?

What are you doing on this forum if you don't believe in the free market?

[donnay]

Not having cashiers doesn't mean a loss in jobs, there has to be more professionals behind the scenes making sure the technology works, and it's higher paying. Anyone who believes in a free market wont argue that you shouldn't do 'x' because people will lose jobs, in fact more innovation usually means more opportunities in the future

Ahhhh, I believe in a free market of which we do not have. Technology is a wonderful thing so long as it stays in the right hands.

[Nickels]

What are you doing on this forum if you don't believe in the free market?

to be specific, I don't believe a free market is perfect solution to everything, and I definitely don't beleive lacking one is the scapegoat for everything. I believe in responsibility, and doing what you can in a system that isn't perfect for you. Why not just answer the question?

[Nickels]

Ahhhh, I believe in a free market of which we do not have. Technology is a wonderful thing so long as it stays in the right hands.

glad we agree.

[PaulConventionWV]

You talking to me? I am not bolstering this plan. I am making people aware that these agendas will help promote the cashless society grid agenda.

I know. I was thinking aloud, not talking to you.

[MelissaWV]

I don't know about you, but going to a store and NOT having to deal with people would make me quite depressed.

Yeah it's way more fun when you have a little kid who needs to pee, trying to flag down some lady from cosmetics to ask her where the bathroom is, so that she can in turn kind of look vacantly around the store and ask someone in jewelry who can then wander back to the main aisle with you, point towards customer service, and let you know that it's back the way you came a little bit, then turn around and say, "or is it that way...". Those are my favorite experiences!

Seriously, stores are huge and multi-faceted and constantly bringing in new merchandise. The people working there know how to check out what you bring to them. They seldom know how to provide "service" beyond asking you if you'd like to sign up for their store credit card. I'm not really sure of the last question I had while in a store that could not be answered by a machine.

[donnay]

Yep. My husband hates the self-scanners. I love them. The only time I don't use them is when I have so much stuff it won't all fit on the carousel.

For a while, Jewel Osco had thumb scanners tied to your checking account. That meant I could ride my bike to the store without carrying a purse or even a card. I knew the privacy implications, but it was worth it to me.

These conveniences are designed to ultimately enslave us. Biometrics along with a cashless society is all part of the agenda. Next step it will implantable microchips.

[PaulConventionWV]

I apologize for my ignorance.

But what do you mean "payroll sucks and costs too much"? Is it the taxes itself that take away capital from employees? Or the cost of preparing them? And if the latter, don't they only get complicated based on how many employees/expenses you have (which by that time, it's balanced with revenue)?

Who would have thought a statement like "payroll sucks and costs too much" could be misunderstood? How many alternate meanings to that sentence are there?

[donnay]

glad we agree.

How do we agree when you are under the illusion we have a free market?

[angelatc]

I apologize for my ignorance.

But what do you mean "payroll sucks and costs too much"? Is it the taxes itself that take away capital from employees? Or the cost of preparing them? And if the latter, don't they only get complicated based on how many employees/expenses you have (which by that time, it's balanced with revenue)?

No, I didn't mean it took capital away from the employees. I meant it tied up capital that the business could use in other places. But yes - payrolls taxes are expensive. It's not rocket science, but they vary by city, state, township, county, village. And a lot of times the taxes are assessed based on where the employee lives, not simply where the business is located.

And the minutiae - People don't always work their whole 40 hours, or they work more than 40 hours. THey forget to clock in, they forget to clock out. They take vacation days, they take sick days, they come in late, they go home early. They get tax liens attached to their checks, they get child support deducted. They get reimbursed, they get raises, they get bonuses, they get commissions.

There's a reason that ADP exists.

[PaulConventionWV]

wow. well, I guess you need more friends then :)

Yeah, thanks a lot.

[PaulConventionWV]

to be specific, I don't believe a free market is perfect solution to everything, and I definitely don't beleive lacking one is the scapegoat for everything. I believe in responsibility, and doing what you can in a system that isn't perfect for you. Why not just answer the question?

What question?

[PaulConventionWV]

Yeah it's way more fun when you have a little kid who needs to pee, trying to flag down some lady from cosmetics to ask her where the bathroom is, so that she can in turn kind of look vacantly around the store and ask someone in jewelry who can then wander back to the main aisle with you, point towards customer service, and let you know that it's back the way you came a little bit, then turn around and say, "or is it that way...". Those are my favorite experiences!

Seriously, stores are huge and multi-faceted and constantly bringing in new merchandise. The people working there know how to check out what you bring to them. They seldom know how to provide "service" beyond asking you if you'd like to sign up for their store credit card. I'm not really sure of the last question I had while in a store that could not be answered by a machine.

Wow, I honestly thought more people would value human interaction more. I guess I was wrong.

[donnay]

Wow, I honestly thought more people would value human interaction more. I guess I was wrong.

This society is becoming very reclusive. Now with all the technology, no one has to meet anyone face to face--just keyboard to keyboard. Sad really.

[MelissaWV]

Wow, I honestly thought more people would value human interaction more. I guess I was wrong.

I value human interaction. I don't value the employees at the mall anchor stores. It's a bit of a distinction :p When I get in and out and buy my jeans faster, I can spend time with people I want to spend time with.

Now, when I go to a farmer's market, I love the interaction and service I get, particularly in discussing where the food came from and possibly picking up tips for storage and use. Those questions are NOT best answered by a machine.

It comes back to what I said: I'm not sure when I last had a question about how to operate a pair of jeans.

[MelissaWV]

This society is becoming very reclusive. Now with all the technology, no one has to meet any one face to face--just keyboard to keyboard. Sad really.

Yeah that's me :rolleyes: I spend all day online researching how everything can hurt me.

[angelatc]

Wow, I honestly thought more people would value human interaction more. I guess I was wrong.

I don't mind human interaction, but I don't crave the interaction that a large number of retail associates provide. I wouldn't mind hovering salespeople if they could actually give me selection advice.

For example, I'm at the jewelry counter. I am fashion impaired, but wanted to buy something that would look nice at a wedding. I asked the staff at the counter for a suggestion. I told her the type of neckline it was, that it was an upscale night wedding, and she could see my face. She said "Oh, anything will go fine. Let me know if you want to see anything."

What I wanted was a girly-girl to help a tomboy out. Instead, dead space. And no sale, either. I really don't mind replacing her with an auto-matron.

[Nickels]

How do we agree when you are under the illusion we have a free market?

I am not under any illusion. Why do you say that?

[Nickels]

Wow, I honestly thought more people would value human interaction more. I guess I was wrong.

Then I think you can make a good customer service person, there's your calling :)

[Nickels]

Yeah that's me :rolleyes: I spend all day online researching how everything can hurt me.

lol exactly!

[Nickels]

This society is becoming very reclusive. Now with all the technology, no one has to meet anyone face to face--just keyboard to keyboard. Sad really.

So a country without technology is better? I think that's what I suspected of you in the beginning, your beef is ultimately with technology and convenience.

[PaulConventionWV]

This society is becoming very reclusive. Now with all the technology, no one has to meet anyone face to face--just keyboard to keyboard. Sad really.

Which is exactly what I mean. People just don't care anymore how secluded their lives are, shielded from the difficulty of having to *gasp* talk to people. Who cares how uneventful your life is as long as it's convenient and "saves time." I'm not someone who constantly strives for convenience. Unlike some, I'll take the few extra minutes to sort out human errors or talk to the people behind the counter. I used to be one.

[PaulConventionWV]

I don't mind human interaction, but I don't crave the interaction that a large number of retail associates provide. I wouldn't mind hovering salespeople if they could actually give me selection advice.

For example, I'm at the jewelry counter. I am fashion impaired, but wanted to buy something that would look nice at a wedding. I asked the staff at the counter for a suggestion. I told her the type of neckline it was, that it was an upscale night wedding, and she could see my face. She said "Oh, anything will go fine. Let me know if you want to see anything."

What I wanted was a girly-girl to help a tomboy out. Instead, dead space. And no sale, either. I really don't mind replacing her with an auto-matron.

Suit yourself. I guess we're just two different types of people.

[MelissaWV]

Which is exactly what I mean. People just don't care anymore how secluded their lives are, shielded from the difficulty of having to *gasp* talk to people. Who cares how uneventful your life is as long as it's convenient and "saves time." I'm not someone who constantly strives for convenience. Unlike some, I'll take the few extra minutes to sort out human errors or talk to the people behind the counter. I used to be one.

I don't think you get it. Buying a pair of shoes should not be an all-day event. I know approximately what size I wear, I know what style I need, and I will go grab a few and try them on if I'm "allowed" to. This is why stores have mostly gone to having the shoe boxes out and available, now, instead of some person trying to earn a commission by going back to "see if I have this in your size." When I can do that, rapidly, I can spend time with people I know.

Not wanting to sit around chitchatting with a shoe specialist does not make me antisocial. It makes me want to spend more time with people whose company I value so much that I will absolutely kick myself for not spending more time with them when they die. I don't think that, at their funerals, I will be saying "Man oh man if only I had spent less time with mom and had, instead, had a much longer shopping experience with that lady who seemed to know nothing about the clothing she was trying to sell me."

[PaulConventionWV]

Then I think you can make a good customer service person, there's your calling :)

Thank you for the low-grade insults. Really, it just adds so much to the conversation.

[Nickels]

No, I didn't mean it took capital away from the employees. I meant it tied up capital that the business could use in other places. But yes - payrolls taxes are expensive. It's not rocket science, but they vary by city, state, township, county, village. And a lot of times the taxes are assessed based on where the employee lives, not simply where the business is located.

And the minutiae - People don't always work their whole 40 hours, or they work more than 40 hours. THey forget to clock in, they forget to clock out. They take vacation days, they take sick days, they come in late, they go home early. They get tax liens attached to their checks, they get child support deducted. They get reimbursed, they get raises, they get bonuses, they get commissions.

There's a reason that ADP exists.

Again, my ignorance. But can't employers work out voluntary agreements to simplify the process?

For example "Every minute counts, we add up all the minutes, then round to the nearest hour every pay day".
"Forgot to clock in? Your problem, unless we have a camera to prove it" (In fact, if we have a camera, we don't need you to clock in)
"No overtime bonuses, but if a task doesn't get done after a certain period, we'll find somebody that'll do it"
These might not be perfect solutions, but if the math hurts you so much, wouldn't these work?

[Nickels]

Thank you for the low-grade insults. Really, it just adds so much to the conversation.

I apologize, because I was really complimenting you, wasn't sarcastic.

[Nickels]

I don't think you get it. Buying a pair of shoes should not be an all-day event.

It is if you're a woman.

[Nickels]

What question?

So that must mean living conditions are equally as good in both countries (China and US)?

Both countries are regulated by their government, which makes each set of people beholden to government to survive.
Ok, so what country is NOT regulated by their government? Can you tell me? Or more importantly, can you tell which country is wealthier or preferable to live as a result of "lacking regulation"?

If we had a truly free market, the government would only step in, insofar as, if a product or business injured a person or persons.
Not interested in your speculative "If we had a truly Scotsman utopia", give me a solid example if you can.


But the Marxist/Leninist had taken over a long time ago and have been able to perpetuate an illusion of free market. Just check out the Communist Manifesto, if you do not believe me. ....
so this country was wrong how long ago?

these questions, do you know the answers?

[PaulConventionWV]

I don't think you get it. Buying a pair of shoes should not be an all-day event. I know approximately what size I wear, I know what style I need, and I will go grab a few and try them on if I'm "allowed" to. This is why stores have mostly gone to having the shoe boxes out and available, now, instead of some person trying to earn a commission by going back to "see if I have this in your size." When I can do that, rapidly, I can spend time with people I know.

Not wanting to sit around chitchatting with a shoe specialist does not make me antisocial. It makes me want to spend more time with people whose company I value so much that I will absolutely kick myself for not spending more time with them when they die. I don't think that, at their funerals, I will be saying "Man oh man if only I had spent less time with mom and had, instead, had a much longer shopping experience with that lady who seemed to know nothing about the clothing she was trying to sell me."

I never said you were anti-social. You just don't seem to care much for meeting new people or having experiences that are outside of your little circle of associations.

[MelissaWV]

It is if you're a woman.

I am, and it shouldn't be. Luckily Rack Room Shoes has their shoes buy-one-get-one-1/2-off, which allows me to make my purchase of two pairs of New Balance sneakers every few years at reduced cost. I am in and out of the store in about 10 minutes. It is plain to see whether or not they have my size, and I don't have to ask anyone to please go see for me :) It is heavenly.

[PaulConventionWV]

I apologize, because I was really complimenting you, wasn't sarcastic.

Apology accepted.

[donnay]

Yeah that's me :rolleyes: I spend all day online researching how everything can hurt me.

Why did you take that as a personal affront? I was talking about society, as a whole. I agree with you on your above post: "Now, when I go to a farmer's market, I love the interaction and service I get, particularly in discussing where the food came from and possibly picking up tips for storage and use. Those questions are NOT best answered by a machine."

I couldn't agree more. I even +rep you for that. Oh well.

As I said earlier, technology can be a good thing as long as it stays in the right hands. It concerns me when I see too many people depending upon the technology for their everyday lives. Kindle/Nook/E-Book, I can see this technology becoming the modern-day book burning at some point. Guess I am old fashioned in that way, I like to have tangible things to reference, rather than turning on a electronic device to search for something that may have been arbitrarily scrubbed because the owners of the Kindle/Nook/E-Book decided that it was not in my best interest to have. I have already witnessed this happening to people I know.

[Nickels]

I am, and it shouldn't be. Luckily Rack Room Shoes has their shoes buy-one-get-one-1/2-off, which allows me to make my purchase of two pairs of New Balance sneakers every few years at reduced cost. I am in and out of the store in about 10 minutes. It is plain to see whether or not they have my size, and I don't have to ask anyone to please go see for me :) It is heavenly.

if only more people think mathematically.

[MelissaWV]

I never said you were anti-social. You just don't seem to care much for meeting new people or having experiences that are outside of your little circle of associations.

Yeah... because I don't want to talk to "customer service" people at the mall. Oooookay. I'm sure you know ALL about me! I worked customer service as well, and frankly the creepy people that wanted to talk to me all day were the ones I liked least. If you like to consider yourself the height of social charity because you talk to some roving customer service person in a department store (keeping them from doing their other jobs), more power to ya. :)

[PaulConventionWV]

So that must mean living conditions are equally as good in both countries (China and US)?

Both countries are regulated by their government, which makes each set of people beholden to government to survive.
Ok, so what country is NOT regulated by their government? Can you tell me? Or more importantly, can you tell which country is wealthier or preferable to live as a result of "lacking regulation"?

If we had a truly free market, the government would only step in, insofar as, if a product or business injured a person or persons.
Not interested in your speculative "If we had a truly Scotsman utopia", give me a solid example if you can.


But the Marxist/Leninist had taken over a long time ago and have been able to perpetuate an illusion of free market. Just check out the Communist Manifesto, if you do not believe me. ....
so this country was wrong how long ago?

these questions, do you know the answers?

I asked "What question?" because your post didn't have a question in it, even though you asked me "Why not just answer the question?"

Then you retort that simple question with "So that must mean living conditions are equally as good in both countries?"

No, I never said that. I simply asked what question you posed since the post in which you told me to answer the question didn't contain a question.

[Nickels]

As I said earlier, technology can be a good thing as long as it stays in the right hands.


And I agreed with you on that. But you had to ask "how can we agree when you're under illusion".



It concerns me when I see too many people depending upon the technology for their everyday lives.


It concerns me when I see kids growing up not knowing how to camp and hunt.



Kindle/Nook/E-Book, I can see this technology becoming the modern-day book burning at some point.


By book burning you mean censorship? or just being paperless?



Guess I am old fashioned in that way, I like to have tangible things to reference, rather than turning on a electronic device to search for something that may have been arbitrarily scrubbed because the owners of the Kindle/Nook/E-Book decided that it was not in my best interest to have. I have already witnessed this happening to people I know.

Nothing wrong with that, you have your preferences. But I am sorry to tell you that if the market decides to get rid of paper books, you'll have a harder time finding new books in print. Just like you will have a harder time today finding vinyls, vhs, tapes, cds.

[moostraks]

I don't think you get it. Buying a pair of shoes should not be an all-day event. I know approximately what size I wear, I know what style I need, and I will go grab a few and try them on if I'm "allowed" to. This is why stores have mostly gone to having the shoe boxes out and available, now, instead of some person trying to earn a commission by going back to "see if I have this in your size." When I can do that, rapidly, I can spend time with people I know.

Not wanting to sit around chitchatting with a shoe specialist does not make me antisocial. It makes me want to spend more time with people whose company I value so much that I will absolutely kick myself for not spending more time with them when they die. I don't think that, at their funerals, I will be saying "Man oh man if only I had spent less time with mom and had, instead, had a much longer shopping experience with that lady who seemed to know nothing about the clothing she was trying to sell me."

We are on absolute opposite poles on this but probably shop with a similar attitude in many respects. I don't want to spend all day trying things on and getting false compliments. I generally know what I am looking for and want to price check or get it and leave. However, I do not want to have a thumb scan or have my wallet scanned for my debit card to pay purchases. If I need a restroom or to ask a question on an item I don't want a kiosk with an FAQ section. Different strokes for different folks, except your way will be pushed because the goal is control- a cashless system is a system that will guarantee a better return for those in power and the larger retailers. I hope I die before this is widely popular.(knock on wood...)

[Nickels]

I asked "What question?" because your post didn't have a question in it, even though you asked me "Why not just answer the question?"

Then you retort that simple question with "So that must mean living conditions are equally as good in both countries?"

No, I never said that. I simply asked what question you posed since the post in which you told me to answer the question didn't contain a question.

so now that I gave you the questions, can you answer them or admit you don't know?

Thanks for answering the first one.

You admit China and US are not equal in living conditions. Does pointing out this fact mean I "don't believe in free markets"?

Can you answer the rest, and see if we differ, before you accuse me of "not believing in free market"?

[donnay]

We are on absolute opposite poles on this but probably shop with a similar attitude in many respects. I don't want to spend all day trying things on and getting false compliments. I generally know what I am looking for and want to price check or get it and leave. However, I do not want to have a thumb scan or have my wallet scanned for my debit card to pay purchases. If I need a restroom or to ask a question on an item I don't want a kiosk with an FAQ section. Different strokes for different folks, except your way will be pushed because the goal is control- a cashless system is a system that will guarantee a better return for those in power and the larger retailers. I hope I die before this is widely popular.(knock on wood...)

Bingo! We have a winner! Well said. +rep

[PaulConventionWV]

Yeah... because I don't want to talk to "customer service" people at the mall. Oooookay. I'm sure you know ALL about me! I worked customer service as well, and frankly the creepy people that wanted to talk to me all day were the ones I liked least. If you like to consider yourself the height of social charity because you talk to some roving customer service person in a department store (keeping them from doing their other jobs), more power to ya. :)

That's the problem. You treat all customer service people as if they're just nuisances and not someone you want to waste your time on. What if you saw them as actual people and weren't so cynical about meeting new people? Oh, I forgot, customer service reps aren't real people and don't deserve the light of day. I don't talk to people all day. The point is that I don't mind the warmth of talking to a person even if it means a little less convenience. Being surrounded by machines makes me miss the compassion of some random stranger, and I don't get all hot-headed if there is a little miscommunication because at least I know I'm talking to something that can feel.

[moostraks]

As I said earlier, technology can be a good thing as long as it stays in the right hands. It concerns me when I see too many people depending upon the technology for their everyday lives. Kindle/Nook/E-Book, I can see this technology becoming the modern-day book burning at some point. Guess I am old fashioned in that way, I like to have tangible things to reference, rather than turning on a electronic device to search for something that may have been arbitrarily scrubbed because the owners of the Kindle/Nook/E-Book decided that it was not in my best interest to have.

totally agree with you here....

[specsaregood]

Ahhhh, I believe in a free market of which we do not have. Technology is a wonderful thing so long as it stays in the right hands.

And whose hands are "the right hands"? Are you the decider? or do you just hate lefthanded people? :)

[moostraks]

That's the problem. You treat all customer service people as if they're just nuisances and not someone you want to waste your time on. What if you saw them as actual people and weren't so cynical about meeting new people? Oh, I forgot, customer service reps aren't real people and don't deserve the light of day. I don't talk to people all day. The point is that I don't mind the warmth of talking to a person even if it means a little less convenience. Being surrounded by machines makes me miss the compassion of some random stranger, and I don't get all hot-headed if there is a little miscommunication because at least I know I'm talking to something that can feel.

I have a bank that a drive an extra 20+ minutes to because I have been treated with respect as a valuable customer. The trip to my bank is a total of 45+ minutes from my house. The human factor of that branch makes it worth my time, aggravation, and loyalty. I could get a bank account just a few blocks from my home right now but choose not to. Life should be more than just about convenience.

[PaulConventionWV]

It concerns me when I see kids growing up not knowing how to camp and hunt.

We agree on something. Some people would rather do away with such inconveniences as having to learn how to live in nature and replace it with all the creature comforts their hearts could desire, surrounded by little gadgets. I do feel old fashioned saying this, but that's really how I feel.

For reference, this is the type of thing that concerns me:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38

[moostraks]

And whose hands are "the right hands"? Are you the decider? or do you just hate lefthanded people? :)

I can't seem to remember, is it lefties are not in their right mind?:p

[PaulConventionWV]

so now that I gave you the questions, can you answer them or admit you don't know?

Thanks for answering the first one.

You admit China and US are not equal in living conditions. Does pointing out this fact mean I "don't believe in free markets"?

Can you answer the rest, and see if we differ, before you accuse me of "not believing in free market"?

I never said I would play 20 questions with you. I wasn't even arguing with you about that, but you seem to think I am obligated to answer your questions anyway.

[donnay]

And whose hands are "the right hands"? Are you the decider? or do you just hate lefthanded people? :)

Free market and full transparency--the way our country was set-up to be.

[PaulConventionWV]

I have a bank that a drive an extra 20+ minutes to because I have been treated with respect as a valuable customer. The trip to my bank is a total of 45+ minutes from my house. The human factor of that branch makes it worth my time, aggravation, and loyalty. I could get a bank account just a few blocks from my home right now but choose not to. Life should be more than just about convenience.

Exactly.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_424843&feature=iv&src_vid=6Cf7IL_eZ38&v=jZkHpNnXLB0

[donnay]

I have a bank that a drive an extra 20+ minutes to because I have been treated with respect as a valuable customer. The trip to my bank is a total of 45+ minutes from my house. The human factor of that branch makes it worth my time, aggravation, and loyalty. I could get a bank account just a few blocks from my home right now but choose not to. Life should be more than just about convenience.

Another well said point. My bank is an hour from my house, it is a small credit union. I too, can transfer, if I wanted, to a bank in my town. Actually there are three major banks in my small town. I want no part of those, too big to fail, banks anyway.

[angelatc]

Suit yourself. I guess we're just two different types of people.



I already knew that, but I'm not sure we're entirely disagreeing here. I'm just saying that people in retail should be paid to provide a valuable service, not just idle conversation. I do like talking to them when they enjoy their job and are familiar with the product they're selling. I'm not a xenophobe just because I expect the conversation to surround the only thing I know for sure we have in common.

[angelatc]

Life should be more than just about convenience.

You love your life your way, I'll live it mine. And my bank is still a credit union in Indiana. We haven't lived there since my 8th grader was in Kindergarten.

[angelatc]

Bingo! We have a winner! Well said. +rep

I think the market will decide the winner.

[PaulConventionWV]

I already knew that, but I'm not sure we're entirely disagreeing here. I'm just saying that people in retail should be paid to provide a valuable service, not just idle conversation. I do like talking to them when they enjoy their job and are familiar with the product they're selling. I'm not a xenophobe just because I expect the conversation to surround the only thing I know for sure we have in common.

Maybe you're right. I never expected customer service reps to provide us with idle conversation. They're supposed to do their job. It's more about the nobility of being human and having to relate with other people rather than having all the answers provided to you in some ready-made database that doesn't require any thinking or social skills.

[Nickels]

I never said I would play 20 questions with you. I wasn't even arguing with you about that, but you seem to think I am obligated to answer your questions anyway.

You ask me "Why are you here if you don't believe in free market" without basis, and I wanted to know what you believe. So yes, if you are going to say I don't believe in free market, you are obligated to tell me what you believe.

[MelissaWV]

Maybe you're right. I never expected customer service reps to provide us with idle conversation. They're supposed to do their job. It's more about the nobility of being human and having to relate with other people rather than having all the answers provided to you in some ready-made database that doesn't require any thinking or social skills.

:rolleyes: Their job?! You're just reducing them to some mundane representative! You've been waxing poetic and talking about how I should see them as people, but I don't treat random people I meet for the first time as if they should provide me info on something.

I keep talking about the last question you had answered at a department store by a human being that they absolutely knew the answer to. Is there one? I go to make my purchase and leave. I don't generally need questions answered about jeans or socks or tee shirts, other than how much they cost, or perhaps something on the label. If I held up a blouse to a wandering associate, and asked if it needed ironing, you do realize they would most likely refer to the label? If I want to know the price, they will do a price check at a register --- that mirrors the little "price check" scanners at many mainstream stores. That is what I mean by not caring about the in-store "customer service" angle of this article, about this store.

Banks? You should have oodles of questions for any financial institution. That is where service comes into play, just as I talked about with food. The difference here is that it's highly unlikely you are going to find a clothing expert in JCP's clothing section. You absolutely should demand an expert at a bank, and people who actually know where your food comes from are invaluable at small farm stands and markets. Of course, maybe you don't want that; that's why the option should exist either way.

Making the jump from my not having any questions an associate/rep/whatever can help me with when I go shopping, to accusations that I don't see customer service reps as people, is an astouding contortion.

As for the camping, it is an example of something you do that requires quite a bit of time. If I'm still navigating the local department store patiently listening to every employee tell me things I already know about products I do not want, I'm not spending time camping. I'm spending time at the mall. "Convenience" means you have time for other things; it's up to the individual to decide the costs.

[Nickels]

I'm spending time at the mall. "Convenience" means you have time for other things; it's up to the individual to decide the costs.

so true.

[donnay]

I think the market will decide the winner.

Which market would that be?

[puppetmaster]

So basically government causes or encourages unemployment. Is that saying the government is good because it causes unemployment? or bad?

Government inhibits employment and drives up costs...which I feel is a bad thing.

[PaulConventionWV]

:rolleyes: Their job?! You're just reducing them to some mundane representative! You've been waxing poetic and talking about how I should see them as people, but I don't treat random people I meet for the first time as if they should provide me info on something.

I keep talking about the last question you had answered at a department store by a human being that they absolutely knew the answer to. Is there one? I go to make my purchase and leave. I don't generally need questions answered about jeans or socks or tee shirts, other than how much they cost, or perhaps something on the label. If I held up a blouse to a wandering associate, and asked if it needed ironing, you do realize they would most likely refer to the label? If I want to know the price, they will do a price check at a register --- that mirrors the little "price check" scanners at many mainstream stores. That is what I mean by not caring about the in-store "customer service" angle of this article, about this store.

Banks? You should have oodles of questions for any financial institution. That is where service comes into play, just as I talked about with food. The difference here is that it's highly unlikely you are going to find a clothing expert in JCP's clothing section. You absolutely should demand an expert at a bank, and people who actually know where your food comes from are invaluable at small farm stands and markets. Of course, maybe you don't want that; that's why the option should exist either way.

Making the jump from my not having any questions an associate/rep/whatever can help me with when I go shopping, to accusations that I don't see customer service reps as people, is an astouding contortion.

As for the camping, it is an example of something you do that requires quite a bit of time. If I'm still navigating the local department store patiently listening to every employee tell me things I already know about products I do not want, I'm not spending time camping. I'm spending time at the mall. "Convenience" means you have time for other things; it's up to the individual to decide the costs.

Ok, so let's examine that for a second.

I say "You're seeing them as nuisances." You say "You're seeing them as some mundane representative." What is the logical connection that makes the second setence a good analogy for the first one. The point is that they're people, not that you have to respect them or love them or treat them as if they were so important. The point is I would rather have to deal with a creepy or annoying representative than a machine because it requires social skills. I don't call it waxing poetic. I treat them as people, but I don't expect them to liven my life a whole lot. I just prefer the warmth of human interaction to the completely introverted experience of conversing with a computer. Computers can't care. People can, and I have met a good many sales reps who really do and have become well-acquainted with them.

Also, I'm not talking about what options should exist. The free market can sort that out. I'm talking about what I prefer.

[Danan]

Using Japan as your model for innovation might not be a great idea. They have automated everything, oven just for the novelty of it. They also have a "theme park" for just about anything you can think of. I won't go into details; that's what the internet is for.

I'm generally not a huge "Japan-fan", but the one thing I really love about their culture is their passion for new technology. I'm personally not the kind of guy who stands in a row to buy the new iPad every year, but I do admire their lacking fear of innovation. To me that's a superior mentallity compared to how negative people from my area react to technology.

And I would love to try one of those freaking Japanese toilets!



The bigger problem consumers don't seem to notice is that cashiers do not use the "tare" key anymore. You are now paying for the plastic bag those bananas are in.

I'm sorry but I have to correct you there. The Austrian government passed a law recently that mandates grocery stores to weigh food without tara weight. And everyone seems to agree that this was indeed a very useful law. The problem is it isn't useful at all. Now I'm not saying that you advocate such laws. But even the desired effect of lower food prices won't come true.

It doesn't matter how a business weighs food. Let's say the bananas are currently weighed without tara and cost 1$ (per arbitrary weight unit). Now the store decides to weigh the bananas with tara and the scale shows 1.10$. The customer realizes a price increase. He doesn't care about how the price increase came about. He just realizes it and takes it into consideration. If we agree that customers are price sensitive to some extend then the price per weight unit has to go down if the business decides to include tara weight but still wants to have the same revenue, so that in the end the same amount of bananas (netto) costs the same amount of money as it previously did.

Now some people make the argument that consumers won't take the increased prices into consideration and therefore this is unfair. I don't agree with that satement. But even if this were true, what stops business to just increase the price per weight unit then? Changing the weighing method seems to be a rather difficult way of increasing overall prices.


Or let me put it this way: If my local grocery store decided to put a basket with little rocks beside the scale and to add one of the rocks to every weighing process I couldn't tell you whether or not I would continue to shop there without further information. It would depend on how they alter the price of their food after introducing this new "method". Obviously they couldn't add the rocks and keep the old prices because people would go elsewhere. If it turns out that I'd pay less or just as much as before I wouldn't mind. If the opposite is the case I'd have to rethink this.


Most shops don't weigh without tara because it's easier to do it with packaging. They already factored that in when they were doing their price calculations.

[Nickels]

Government inhibits employment and drives up costs...which I feel is a bad thing.

automation and unemployment does not drive up costs, they are in response to increase costs, so they ultimately DECREASE costs.

[Zippyjuan]

And you think it is hard to find somebody to help you in the store now....


The money saved could then be used to help bolster customer service.

Really? I'm thinking security guards standing by the doors. Once thieves figure out where the RFID tags are, the merchandise should start flying off the shelves and out the door.

I worked in a department store for a while (also worked for the famous Harrod's Department store in London- saw many celebreties including the Queen's husband Prince Phillip in there). This is one reason for the high unemployment among unskilled workers- they have been replaced by technology. Even if they may be easier or faster- avoid self checkout and go help support workers and jobs by going to a real checker. They don't earn lots of money (usually) but they do spend it in other local businesses which also enourages more workers there. It helps everybody.

[MelissaWV]

Danan, rather than paste that entire thing, I'll just say it's untrue here, where there is one major grocer at which I used to work, and at which I now regularly shop. Training includes removing tare weights (not just for bags, but numerous other containers). Cashiers just don't do it. It's a teeny amount of money, so most people don't notice and don't care. I do. I ask that they tare off containers (some are up to a 9 or 13 tare at the local grocer). It saves me money, pure and simple. I don't want it to be a law, but these supposedly glorious customer service people and cashiers are too lazy to hit two more keys, and it makes me laugh. People want to say that it's a problem they don't instantly know all the PLUs, while ignoring the fact they could be saving money this way.

* * *

PaulConventionWV, you do assert I see them as a "nuisance." You also still have not answered the question as to what, precisely, the last customer service question you had answered at JCP was. What was it that someone answered that a computer or kiosk could not? It's just a question. I gave various examples of where customer service is pretty important. A giant mall anchor store is not really one of them to me. From there you've gone hopping here and there and everywhere about how that likely means I don't like people :|

No, computers "don't care," but they are also the same exact things that the employees will be referencing if I ask that living, breathing person what the price of something is. You are in favor of a middle man who acts as an interpreter, basically. I would rather shop without that. Stores that offer me a chance to take care of the most basic things myself, yet maintain a service desk or website where I can communicate with them if there is a real problem, will gain my business.

Goodness me. For someone who adores people so much, you can be rather rude about it. It seems rather like I said earlier: convenience allows us more time to spend with those we love... we just each have to decide if the price is okay to pay.

[Danan]

Training includes removing tare weights (not just for bags, but numerous other containers). Cashiers just don't do it. It's a teeny amount of money, so most people don't notice and don't care. I do. I ask that they tare off containers (some are up to a 9 or 13 tare at the local grocer). It saves me money, pure and simple.

* * *

Oh. Ok then I misunderstood you a little bit.

But still it could be the case that the cashier's behaviour is not entirely based on laziness or bad training. It sounds like a rather good way of price discrimination. A business usually has to charge one price for every customer, because it doesn't know their individual demand. Most people would be willing to pay more but the pricing decision is based on the marginal customer. By ignoring the tare function of the scale the store can charge people who are less price sensitive a higher price while people who are more likely to avoid buying the product at a higher price could still complain about the not used tare function and lower the price slightly.

It serves some kind of bargaining function for marginal customers. I wouldn't be suprised at all if their trainers advised cashiers to avoid the tare function on default.

[RickyJ]

They are fighting to remain viable, to stay in business and keep the doors open, thus preserving jobs of most of their employees. Anything that will help them stay in business against lower cost retailers like Wal-Mart and Target is exactly what they should be doing. If they don't they might as well go out of business now.

[John F Kennedy III]

A Store Without a Checkout Counter? JCPenney Presses on with Retail Revolution

(...)

Johnson explained that physical retailers should be able to do everything an online-only retailer like Amazon does and more—including face-to-face customer service and options such as in-store pickup.

Most noteworthy of all, Johnson announced JCPenney’s plans to completely change the checkout experience at stores. Using advanced Wi-Fi networks, mobile checkout, RFID (radio-frequency identification) tracking systems for goods, and all sorts of self-checkout possibilities, JCPenney will get rid of cashiers, cash registers, and checkout counters, the staples near the exits of virtually every store, as soon as 2014.

“Think of a physical store without a cash rep,” Johnson said. “About 10% of all the money we spend, half a billion dollars a year, goes to transactions. Well that could be done through technology.” The money saved could then be used to help bolster customer service.

Will consumers embrace a cash-less, cashier-less, checkout counter-less store? Investors seem to like the idea. After Johnson’s statements made news, JCPenney’s stock jumped to over $21 per share, after trading for around $19 early on Wednesday.

Continued... (http://moneyland.time.com/2012/07/20/a-store-without-a-checkout-counter-jcpenney-presses-on-with-retail-revolution/?xid=rss-topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+time%2Ftopstories+%28TIME%3A+ Top+Stories%29)

All these nice corporations setting us up for the cashless grid--another UN agenda

Yep.

[RonPaulIsGreat]

To late people, the decision has already been made and being worked toward for some time.

Initially, they tried the self checkout, as solution that could exist without complimentary support from the back end (inventory), as in trying to make that self checkout counter work by itself in an environment designed for human verification and interaction. So, the system had to function in a less than ideal manner.

However, they are now implementing from the back (manufacturer-loading-shipping-unloading-inventory placement-tracking-checkout) forward. So, instead of trying to make that self checkout line do everything based on crude factors like a barcode and weight to determine and verify product, the second round will be much more reliable, verifiable, and faster.

So, first you have the RFID right, well Wal-mart has been slowly but surely demanding RFID integration throughout the supply chain as in at the pallet level, at the case level, and at the individual unit level. So, they are slowly working to automate the shipping process as well. They also are reducing the time it takes to count in store inventory, as all inventory counting entails with RFID is waving a reader in the approximate area, and it reads them all in seconds. So, that is a jobs reduction you will see more and more before you see it at the counter.

Next you will see the RFID working in concert with the regular checkouts, to serve as a mechanism for stopping UPC manipulation, as in replacing UPC codes on boxes. This also serves as a mechanism for testing the accuracy of RFID, before "REAL FULL" self checkout happens.

Next you will have Full realtime 24/7 RFID tracking of all inventory in the store at all times. As in the store will have small RFID scanners all over the store, not for the customers but for tracking all the RFID tags in realtime, and tracking their location. So, if you had a bag that would block the RFID, it would do you absolutely no good at all, as nearly instantly that RFID tag just disappeared from the inventory, and guess what, now you have 5 1080p cameras instinstantly zoomed on that location, and a friendly security guard following you around, and after the first few people get arrested with 0 successful thefts people won't even try.

The only way that system could be circumvented would be to make a fake RFID that could mimic the real RFID tag, and then take the fake RFID out the protective bag, at the same time you put the product with the real RFID in the bag. However, that would require some timing, as if two identical RFID tags showed up at the same time, the same security alert would be activated, plus you would either have to prescan the inventory you were wanting to steal then leave to make your fake RFID's then pull the switch, or have a realtime RFID encoder with you. But even then your face will be on camera once full HD video recording is implemented in retail, and your facial scan would be uploaded into the general security database, and the next time you enter the store you'd be informed you are not welcome.

Next, and this is overkill, you can integrate real time visual recognition on your product catalog, this is not science fiction, they already have fairly good methods of matching products to randomly placed prerecorded images. So, that system could also help track there inventory by visually comparing the items in your cart, hand, or whatever, to the total items you actually eventually pay for, or to determine if the RFID data is matching the items you really have to deter RFID blocking or faking.

Anyway, there will be no cashiers in your big stores in 20 years. Why? because it's inefficient, also doing it that way is error prone. Also, store lose tons of money to theft, and a large fraction of that theft is facilitated by employees working in concert with theives. As in the checkout girl, knows the guy that is swapping upc codes, and they split the profit on the stolen items.

This doesn't mean there won't be people in the store, it just means they'll probably hire people that are well informed in the department they work in, as in at Wal-Mart they have a 60 year old woman working in the electronics department, while she might be a nice lady, her sole function is stocking shelves opening the locked cases, and checking out the few sales that happen there. However, she knows almost nothing about Electronics. I'd rather have some nerd back there that stocks shelves and knows about TV's, laptops, etc....

The effect of all this is lower theft, lower cost of doing business, and even better customer service, because they don't have to pay people to do inventory, or stand at a checkout line, or unlock cases.

[CaptainAmerica]

Dare I say this is one step closer to a society that no longer uses cash and it will be herded into the the trap of allowing corporations to gain more power not only spy on people but conform the market into those who would be somewhat excommunicated from the market for wanting to use hard money vs a scanner on a gps tracked phone or tablet.the future will most likely be a society in which people can neither buy or sell but through electronic transfers of information which will have all personal information given instantly and location tracking with it as well in real time.when stores move over to purchasing by instant electronic money/info transfer customers at Home depot for instance will be prodded and watched closer as they buy plumbing tools and materials.As it is our era of corporations already spy ..but this will enable a real time look at what people purchase and the smart phones will be atched by the gov.its unfortunate that such cool technology will always be used for corruption and power.I do blame people for accepting this kind of stuff from mega corporations and volunteeringly giving out their personal info in exchange for petty coupons.

[Nickels]

Dare I say this is one step closer to a society that no longer uses cash and it will be herded into the the trap of allowing corporations to gain more power not only spy on people but conform the market into those who would be somewhat excommunicated from the market for wanting to use hard money vs a scanner on a gps tracked phone or tablet.the future will most likely be a society in which people can neither buy or sell but through electronic transfers of information which will have all personal information given instantly and location tracking with it as well in real time.when stores move over to purchasing by instant electronic money/info transfer customers at Home depot for instance will be prodded and watched closer as they buy plumbing tools and materials.As it is our era of corporations already spy ..but this will enable a real time look at what people purchase and the smart phones will be atched by the gov.its unfortunate that such cool technology will always be used for corruption and power.I do blame people for accepting this kind of stuff from mega corporations and volunteeringly giving out their personal info in exchange for petty coupons.

you are free to say that, but wouldn't you be more honest and comfortable just admitting the fact you despise technology, progress and convenience? Isn't that just what you're saying, wrapped around some more fancy words?

[Kluge]

Usually gay guys are a lot better at men's fashion than women. Never let a woman dress you.

Pfft. They're often better at women's fashion as well--that doesn't mean much to me though.

[Weston White]

Lets remove the customer service aspect in order to help bolster customer service which would at that point be non-existent?

Customer service means having someone at the register.

I thought the very same thing.

[Kluge]

Which is exactly what I mean. People just don't care anymore how secluded their lives are, shielded from the difficulty of having to *gasp* talk to people. Who cares how uneventful your life is as long as it's convenient and "saves time." I'm not someone who constantly strives for convenience. Unlike some, I'll take the few extra minutes to sort out human errors or talk to the people behind the counter. I used to be one.

Why do you care whether I want to talk to another person or not? Do what you want and leave me alone--I'll go through the self-checkout line and avoid people because I don't like them.

[Weston White]

No it doesn't. They could alternately staff the men's clothing areas with women willing to help you pick out a better outfit, prop up your ego and keep you from getting stuff that doesn't "match". That would be one example of improving customer service without staffing checkouts.

And you think their shareholders are buying stocks now because they are planning on hiring people to stand around complementing customers and ensuring proper color coordination instead of those assigned to check them out? No, they are not going to hire people to replace those cashiers, they are ousting the cashiers in an effort to increase their bottom-line by about 10%, which has resulted in bringing joy to their shareholders and subsequently increasing the value of their stock.

Besides, who better to complement items and ensure proper color coordination, sizes, etc., than the cashier during checkout of their customer’s finalized purchases?

[moostraks]

you are free to say that, but wouldn't you be more honest and comfortable just admitting the fact you despise technology, progress and convenience? Isn't that just what you're saying, wrapped around some more fancy words?

No, it wouldn't be more honest to say what you are reading into pp remarks. I love technology, but not at the expense of human beings or my privacy. That would not make me a techno-phobe. In my world that translates to shrewd analysis and opposition to the ulterior motives of sociopaths who never have an end to their desire to control their fellow man.

[moostraks]

Why do you care whether I want to talk to another person or not? Do what you want and leave me alone--I'll go through the self-checkout line and avoid people because I don't like them.

Your way of life is almost inevitable. Try going to even a zoo without a smartphone nowadays with those stupid blob squares for info instead of a zookeeper/naturalist who might tell you something interesting about the exhibit. There is nothing that inspires a child more to want to intereact with his world than a digital explanation as opposed to a person that loves their occupation and has a fresh response /sarc. If those like PCWV and I don't go out kicking and screaming why it is detrimental to destroy the human factor, then there won't be any acknowledgment as to why it might not be the great advancement it is being heralded as when our way of life is gone. The victors may write history but I'll be darned if I won't try to leave footnotes somewhere for seekers in the future that know there is something wrong with the sterile environment into which they were born.

[specsaregood]

Your way of life is almost inevitable. Try going to even a zoo without a smartphone nowadays with those stupid blob squares for info instead of a zookeeper/naturalist who might tell you something interesting about the exhibit. There is nothing that inspires a child more to want to intereact with his world than a digital explanation as opposed to a person that loves their occupation and has a fresh response /sarc. If those like PCWV and I don't go out kicking and screaming why it is detrimental to destroy the human factor, then there won't be any acknowledgment as to why it might not be the great advancement it is being heralded as when our way of life is gone. The victors may write history but I'll be darned if I won't try to leave footnotes somewhere for seekers in the future that know there is something wrong with the sterile environment into which they were born.

Funny, I was at the zoo a couple weeks back -- annual pass is the best darn deal in entertainment around -- and we were at the tortoise exhibit and overheard a young child ask the couple zoohelper people there: "whats the difference between a turtle and tortoise?". The best answer they could come up with? "Tortoise are bigger". Really? Thanks but I'll take the digital answer with more details and explain the differences to my kid, myself.

[angelatc]

Which market would that be?

The retail market.

[angelatc]

Your way of life is almost inevitable. Try going to even a zoo without a smartphone nowadays with those stupid blob squares for info instead of a zookeeper/naturalist who might tell you something interesting about the exhibit.


With the exception of the bird and dolphin shows, I've never been to a zoo where a human stood around to answer questions. I've only encountered signs, and boxes with speakers in them that didn't work half the time. I'm fine with signage, but the smart phones would be an improvement over the latter.

Damn smartphone people. Soon the signs will be gone too, all thanks to them. :P

[angelatc]

Besides, who better to complement items and ensure proper color coordination, sizes, etc., than the cashier during checkout of their customer’s finalized purchases?

Go shop in a boutique if you need that.

[angelatc]

And you think it is hard to find somebody to help you in the store now....



Really? I'm thinking security guards standing by the doors. Once thieves figure out where the RFID tags are, the merchandise should start flying off the shelves and out the door.

I worked in a department store for a while (also worked for the famous Harrod's Department store in London- saw many celebreties including the Queen's husband Prince Phillip in there). This is one reason for the high unemployment among unskilled workers- they have been replaced by technology. Even if they may be easier or faster- avoid self checkout and go help support workers and jobs by going to a real checker. They don't earn lots of money (usually) but they do spend it in other local businesses which also enourages more workers there. It helps everybody.

Doesn't help me. Makes prices higher.

[angelatc]

Free market and full transparency--the way our country was set-up to be.

So you don't believe we have a right to privacy?

[truelies]

Well that will be the last of my shopping with them if they want to go complete self check out. I hope they fail, utterly and completely, as an example of how important a human factor is in retail. I am not one of those who wants a hovering sales associate, but the sterile environment of a tracking system and wireless grid is nauseating. I thought that many of the places that were putting in self checkouts were removing them because of cost factors and lack of use?

Exactly my thoughts

[moostraks]

With the exception of the bird and dolphin shows, I've never been to a zoo where a human stood around to answer questions. I've only encountered signs, and boxes with speakers in them that didn't work half the time. I'm fine with signage, but the smart phones would be an improvement over the latter.

Damn smartphone people. Soon the signs will be gone too, all thanks to them. :P
I guess I attend a higher brow set of zoos :p (Miami, Atlanta, Pittsburgh, and Columbus to name a few we often have frequented). There was a time when the different exhibits had people who were interactive with the public, but not so much anymore and it has been diminshed to a few special exhibits as you have stated to be your experience.

As for signage, that is actually the situation at the Columbus Zoo where the information is a name and area and unless you have a smartphone, then you are out of luck on the rest at many of the exhibits.

[angelatc]

I guess I attend a higher brow set of zoos :p (Miami, Atlanta, Pittsburgh, and Columbus to name a few we often have frequented). There was a time when the different exhibits had people who were interactive with the public, but not so much anymore and it has been diminshed to a few special exhibits as you have stated to be your experience.

As for signage, that is actually the situation at the Columbus Zoo where the information is a name and area and unless you have a smartphone, then you are out of luck on the rest at many of the exhibits.

I grew up in Columbus! I remember when that zoo was all cages. Then Jack Hannah came along, and suddenly we were getting national attention with the changes he made.

I have a friend that knows him. I'll call him and bitch. :)

[silverhandorder]

I am for one happy about cellphones and chips replacing mundane labor. First they can make our society richer doing other things and second it saves me on convenience. If you are afraid of technology I don't know how I can help you. It is just the way life goes. Can't expect people to conform to your life style.

[donnay]

Funny, I was at the zoo a couple weeks back -- annual pass is the best darn deal in entertainment around -- and we were at the tortoise exhibit and overheard a young child ask the couple zoohelper people there: "whats the difference between a turtle and tortoise?". The best answer they could come up with? "Tortoise are bigger". Really? Thanks but I'll take the digital answer with more details and explain the differences to my kid, myself.


Thanks to the good ol' public school system we are producing more and more illiterate/ignorant people by the day, that IS the real tragedy of this all.

[donnay]

So you don't believe we have a right to privacy?

Transparency on the market side of a truly free market. Besides you said in an earlier post you have no problem with biometrics (thumb scanning) and the fact it is much more convenient for you to do your shopping.

[angelatc]

I am for one happy about cellphones and chips replacing mundane labor. First they can make our society richer doing other things and second it saves me on convenience. If you are afraid of technology I don't know how I can help you. It is just the way life goes. Can't expect people to conform to your life style.

I'm not afraid of cell phones. I just have no desire to make myself available to the whole world 24/7. Leave a message, I'll call back.

[angelatc]

Transparency on the market side of a truly free market. Besides you said in an earlier post you have no problem with biometrics (thumb scanning) and the fact it is much more convenient for you to do your shopping.

I have no problem with it as long as the government doesn't mandate it. I have no desire to make you scan your thumb, but I don't want to stand in line behind you while you dig through your purse looking for another nickel, either.

That's how markets function best - individuals making choices.

[moostraks]

I grew up in Columbus! I remember when that zoo was all cages. Then Jack Hannah came along, and suddenly we were getting national attention with the changes he made.

I have a friend that knows him. I'll call him and bitch. :)

That would be awesome...lol! While you are at it tell him he needs to mind his business about animal ownership and the new polar bear exhibit is a bit over the top with the global warming. The Columbus zoo is really nice esp. with a North American animal exhibit which most zoos don't do, but I like Pittsburgh's better, as it doesn't seem to be putting on airs so to speak. We haven't made it up to the Cleveland Zoo yet, but are supposed to get reciprocity with our annual Pittsburgh membership.

[moostraks]

Funny, I was at the zoo a couple weeks back -- annual pass is the best darn deal in entertainment around -- and we were at the tortoise exhibit and overheard a young child ask the couple zoohelper people there: "whats the difference between a turtle and tortoise?". The best answer they could come up with? "Tortoise are bigger". Really? Thanks but I'll take the digital answer with more details and explain the differences to my kid, myself.

Which is all part of the profit ratio. They hire people that don't care to do the manual labor instead of paying people who excel at their trade and can relay the information. The electronic format is now the means to combat having to look for and reward the human factor. It does not, however, reward the soul as well. I have seen the spark from an enthusiastic caretaker more than once as they have interacted with my children. The zoo went from a place one goes to see animals to a potential career choice. Zoos should be punished like any other business by taking the dollar elsewhere when they fail to live up to expectations, which we did-annual passes to Pittsburgh now instead of Columbus, because their format is more condusive to our lifestyle. I agree about the annual pass. With a family our size it is the best deal in town. We almost always have had an annual pass to a zoo somewhere in the area we live in.

[donnay]

I have no problem with it as long as the government doesn't mandate it. I have no desire to make you scan your thumb, but I don't want to stand in line behind you while you dig through your purse looking for another nickel, either.

That's how markets function best - individuals making choices.

Yes, ideally, in a free market of which we do not have. Government is mandating the biometrics--drivers licenses all over the country.

The problem with all of this is they will get what they want, because Americans are impatient and want instant gratification.

This is why since 9/11 (12 years) we have seen a rapid descent of our liberties--so many people are willing to give up liberty, not only, for security, but for convenience. True democracy--51% want convenience while 49% are willing to be inconvenienced to guard their liberty. Democracy sucks!

[Nickels]

No, it wouldn't be more honest to say what you are reading into pp remarks. I love technology, but not at the expense of human beings or my privacy. That would not make me a techno-phobe. In my world that translates to shrewd analysis and opposition to the ulterior motives of sociopaths who never have an end to their desire to control their fellow man.

What do you mean by at the expense of human beings? Technology ALWAYS saves time, and ALWAYS makes things more convenient, so eliminating the imaginary privacy you only had due to lack of technology, or decreasing job opportunities, is almost guaranteed, what examples are you thinking of where technology does not do one or both of them?

[Nickels]

Transparency on the market side of a truly free market. Besides you said in an earlier post you have no problem with biometrics (thumb scanning) and the fact it is much more convenient for you to do your shopping.

do you mean when it comes to trading, there should be no privacy?

[LibertyRevolution]

I have no problems with this technology, I don't like waiting in line. I use the self checkout all the time.
There will be sales associates on the floor to help you, you just don't have someone go through all the items you bought and ring them up..

Our local grocery store has that scan it thing where you just scan things as you shop and bag, then just pay at the self checkout, no waiting.
They have 18 registers, 4 are self checkout, and there are only ever 2 cashiers on duty.
I keep waiting for them to get rid of the other 12 registers they don't use.

[Nickels]

I have no problems with this technology, I don't like waiting in line. I use the self checkout all the time.
There will be sales associates on the floor to help you, you just don't have someone go through all the items you bought and ring them up..

Our local grocery store has that scan it thing where you just scan things as you shop and bag, then just pay at the self checkout, no waiting.
They have 18 registers, 4 are self checkout, and there are only ever 2 cashiers on duty.
I keep waiting for them to get rid of the other 12 registers they don't use.

so why do you care about the registers they don't use? what better use of space would they be for?

[heavenlyboy34]

So you don't believe we have a right to privacy?
It's currently settled law that there is no such thing as a right to privacy. Sad but true.

[MelissaWV]

Re: Zoos...

Though I am not generally a theme park lover, I guess growing up around Sea World and Busch Gardens did at least expose me to people who knew what they were talking about. The Baltimore Aquarium likewise has several intelligent folks wandering around to answer questions, and genuine conservation efforts. While I was last there, we saw a gorgeous sea turtle who was missing a flipper and had obviously danced with a boat and lost. She was being fed in the giant tank and we were there watching through an underwater observation area :) I'm sure they also could have had automatic feeders, but instead they had divers in the water interacting with the marine life. That is definitely an instance where a human touch is an enhancement.

[soulcyon]

I totally disagree with the UN agenda conspiracy nonsense (parts of it) - this is really a great way that brick and mortar stores can compete with online stores. If you don't want to be tracked temporarily while you do your shopping, then don't go shopping - as simple as that. You are not being coerced into the invasion of your own privacy, this is still a voluntary choice. Just like how old technologies will start to wane, especially the unprofitable ones, normal methods of shopping will soon be deprecated. This is how capitalism shines and the best of the best will stick out.

[angelatc]

do you mean when it comes to trading, there should be no privacy?

The information that retailers gather should be proprietary. If Target knows what my favorite brand of coffee is, there's no good reason they should happily share that information with WalMart or Kroger. The problem, if there is one, is the banking system tying all that information together via our credit and debit cards. I have little or no control over who knows what about me at that point.

[angelatc]

It's currently settled law that there is no such thing as a right to privacy. Sad but true.

That's funny, because Roe v Wade was decided on the right to privacy.

[heavenlyboy34]

That's funny, because Roe v Wade was decided on the right to privacy.
I thought that was about the privacy of a doctor/patient relationship. Haven't read about it in a good many years.

[angelatc]

so why do you care about the registers they don't use? what better use of space would they be for?

A space that generates income is preferable to one that doesn't. The trick , as I see it, is getting rid of those registers *and* being capable of handling the holiday crowds.

[Nickels]

That's funny, because Roe v Wade was decided on the right to privacy.

There are more recent cases on privacy, such as Lawrence v. Texas. Ron Paul disagrees there is a right to privacy, see the article "Federal Courts and the Imaginary Constitution"

[angelatc]

Yes, ideally, in a free market of which we do not have. Government is mandating the biometrics--drivers licenses all over the country.

The problem with all of this is they will get what they want, because Americans are impatient and want instant gratification.

This is why since 9/11 (12 years) we have seen a rapid descent of our liberties--so many people are willing to give up liberty, not only, for security, but for convenience. True democracy--51% want convenience while 49% are willing to be inconvenienced to guard their liberty. Democracy sucks!

Sure, but free markets are pretty much democracies. Look at video games. I'd be perfectly happy with my GameCube's capabilities. But other gamers weren't, so the market developed new systems. I would be happier if they made new content available for the GameCube format, but the majority of the market moved on.

[angelatc]

There are more recent cases on privacy, such as Lawrence v. Texas. Ron Paul disagrees there is a right to privacy, see the article "Federal Courts and the Imaginary Constitution"

Yes, I don't think there's a right to privacy when you're in public. The Court basically made up a new right when they decided Roe v Wade. But I don't thinl the government needs to track us all the time. It's a huge waste of resources, and creepy to boot.

The whole concept of privacy is kind of 20th century. Before the Industrial age, there wasn't much anybody didn't know about their neighbors.

[Nickels]

Yes, I don't think there's a right to privacy when you're in public. The Court basically made up a new right when they decided Roe v Wade. But I don't thinl the government needs to track us all the time. It's a huge waste of resources, and creepy to boot.

The whole concept of privacy is kind of 20th century. Before the Industrial age, there wasn't much anybody didn't know about their neighbors.

I guess we don't disagree.

"The trick , as I see it, is getting rid of those registers *and* being capable of handling the holiday crowds."
I think that's exactly the problem, they probably think when there are huge crowds, they can no longer trust people to self checkout, and will need to bring in staff, this may mean slower lines, but if there are more lines, it may balance out AND protect the store.

[MelissaWV]

At least in grocery stores, those empty registers are usually not empty. There is money in the drawer and someone logged in, usually office staff, who can come out from the back and help out if things get too busy. When it quiets down again, they shut off their light, go back to the office, and continue with the accounting and inventory duties. Managers will often do the same things, and even some baggers are cross-trained to be able to log in and cashier for a bit.

[donnay]

Sure, but free markets are pretty much democracies. Look at video games. I'd be perfectly happy with my GameCube's capabilities. But other gamers weren't, so the market developed new systems. I would be happier if they made new content available for the GameCube format, but the majority of the market moved on.

http://mises.org/images/FreeMarket.gif

Volume 23, Number 12
December 2003
http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=467

William H. Peterson

The democracy of the market is not the democracy that Plato spoke of in his Republic (c. 370 BC) as "a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder, and dispensing a kind of equality to equals and unequals alike," nor that Aristotle in his Rhetoric (c. 322 BC) chided as "when put to the strain, grows weak, and is supplanted by oligarchy." It is not that which George Bernard Shaw taxed in his Maxims for Revolutionists (1903) as substituting "election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few," nor that Hans-Hermann Hoppe exposes in his Democracy—The God That Failed (Transaction, 2001, p. 96) that "majorities of ‘have-nots’ will relentlessly try to enrich themselves at the expense of the ‘haves’."

For see how Ludwig Mises lit up a near-unknown yet highly effective daily democracy—the marketplace—in his Socialism (Liberty Classics, 1981, p. 11), giving this democracy a critically needed political dimension today. As Mises wrote: "When we call a capitalist society a consumers’ democracy we mean that the power to dispose of the means of production, which belongs to the entrepreneurs and capitalists, can only be acquired by means of the consumers’ ballot, held daily in the marketplace."

Mises was on solid ground. For what is political democracy? See its Greek derivation: rule or "kratia" by the people, the "demos." But who rules whom? Why do state hegemony and interventionism reign today as givens, why does the free individual fade across the West, why does political majoritarianism divide society?

So I say capitalism, so harassed today, should be especially thought through and guarded in the heat of current debate. Note its basis in private property, equal rights, a limited state (so unlimited today). Note it stars entrepreneurs with their private tools of production of goods and services. Note how its fallible CEOs (Enron, Tyco, etc.) get quickly whipped by the stock market, far faster than by the courts or the Securities and Exchange Commission. For firms are democratically led and, if need be, punished, by their customers—i.e., said Mises, by sovereign consumers everywhere with their make-or-break "orders" (what a word!) and their key market price signals.

Whither then our berated, underrated, far overregulated and much misread capitalism? Yet isn’t it still, per our Founders (though the word capitalism had yet to be coined), a royal road to social cooperation, a vital private network of governments of the people, by the people, for the people, all with individual assent—highly-used withdrawable assent?

Withdrawable? Consider in a free society, countless hierarchies of governance of power, such as the New York Times, Harvard, New York Stock Exchange, Microsoft, the Southern Baptists, the Salvation Army, Wal-Mart and some 25 million other firms, farms and organizations; yet all are totally dependent on that withdrawable individual assent. So you’re free to switch from GM to Ford, from Yale to MIT, from Burger King to McDonald’s. And vice versa. Talk about democracy!

Democracy? But isn’t this our political shield for a Pax Americana to police a sinful, quite undemocratic globe, with the focus now on the turbulent undemocratic Middle East? But doesn’t this serve up de Jouvenel’s classic conundrum (74 AD): Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes (But who is to guard the guards themselves?) Thomas Paine saw this snag in 1776 in Common Sense as "a necessary evil."

Bismarck likened the legislative process to the unsightly conversion of pigs into sausages. Churchill said democracy is the least awful way to effect a peaceful change of political power. Or as Swiss thinker Felix Somary held in his Democracy at Bay (Knopf, 1952, p. 6): Political democracy blends two "fictions," one the idea that "an entire people can assume sovereignty," the other the idea of "the innate goodness of man."

So I juxtapose below America’s Political Democracy with the Misesian point of our Consumer Democracy to clarify which is which—and ask you, with both needful of repairs, which needs the most by far?

In one democracy you vote but every other year for candidates (who may not win) to "represent" you and many others indirectly on myriad issues. In the other, you vote daily, often, directly, for specific vendors, goods, or services, in an endless plebiscite going on every minute of every day, with dollars as ballots. To be sure, some get more ballots than others. Yet Mises saw this outcome as transient, as consumers themselves vote "poor people rich and rich people poor" (Human Action, Yale University Press, 1949, p. 270).

So one democracy is public, the other private. One funds failing programs and schools, the other lets failing firms and private schools fail. One is coercive and centralized, the other voluntary and decentralized. One runs, inadvertently, a growth-impeding win-lose zero-sum game, the other, also inadvertently, a pro-growth win-win positive-sum game. This difference, alone, sets America’s future.

One democracy runs by politics and monopoly, unmindful of Henry David Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience of 1849 when he saw "little virtue in the action of masses of men" and voting as "a sort of gaming;" the other runs a market society by economics and competition. One forgets the individual, per William Graham Sumner’s famed "The Forgotten Man" lecture in 1883, the other remembers him/her (imperfectly per that spam on your PC monitor).

One democracy plays incumbency ruses: compromises with principle, gerrymandering, log-rolling, warmongering, free-lunch guises such as big federal "grants" (bribes?) to states and localities ($313 billion, annualized, 1st qtr., 2003), the other is cleansed by competition, cost-cutting, demonstrated market deeds for consumers free to choose.

One democracy veers to the Machiavellian amoral short run in aim, the other to moral contracts and the longer run. One, with coercive power, yields to Acton’s law that power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Yet the other, if gloriously voluntaristic, can and does slip into some corporate behavior—money-grasping or getting into bed with political power to win subsidies, import quotas, and other mischief via special interests—despite President Dwight Eisenhower’s 1961 farewell message against a "military-industrial complex."

One democracy can glorify war, including class warfare, the other glorifies peaceful trade in a virtual global concordance on private property rights (if widely derided as "globalization")—per IBM’s old motto of "World Peace Through World Trade."

One entered World War I, naïvely, as "The War to End War" and "Make the World Safe for Democracy"—only to reap Lenin and Stalin in Russia, Hitler in Germany, Mussolini in Italy, Franco in Spain, Tojo in Japan, Tito in Yugoslavia, Mao in China, Peron in Argentina, Castro in Cuba, Allende in Chile, Pol Pot in Cambodia, and lesser imitators throughout Asia, Africa, Central Europe, Latin America, and the Middle East. President Bush II seeks to "democratize" an entire region while citing Germany and Japan as post-World War II successes, but he remains silent on our failures like North Korea, Vietnam, Bosnia, Somalia, Haiti (this gamely tagged as "Operation Democracy").

One democracy rues income disparity and, like Robin Hood, "transfers" wealth, the other lifts all boats. One denies itself crucial feedback information—or what Mises called "economic calculation," predicting in 1920 the ultimate collapse of socialism à la the USSR—the other uses that calculation to help allocate limited resources to their perceived optimum market uses. One wastes capital and talent (human capital), the other saves and invests it, self-interestedly, yes—yet, when under a moral code and the rule of law—spontaneously, harmoniously, constructively.

Market democracy explains the success of the West via Adam Smith’s "invisible hand" idea of self-interest in a system of "natural liberty," of self-help by helping others, or per his famed line in Wealth of Nations (1776, Modern Library ed., p. 14): "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, or the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard of their own interest."

No question then that capitalism or a market society is America’s greatest democracy. The question is: Can we tame political democracy à la our Founding Fathers in 1776 or will we allow it to devour us per Ancient Greece?

[PaulConventionWV]

You don't have to pay automated self-checkout machines minimum wage. Or provide health insurance. Or withhold taxes. Or pay social security taxes. Or pay unemployment fees/taxes/insurance. Or worry about discrimination lawsuits. Or collectively bargain.

The government's mandates incentivize automation and disincentivize hiring people.

Do minimum wage workers ever get benefits like insurance?

[PaulConventionWV]

Why do you care whether I want to talk to another person or not? Do what you want and leave me alone--I'll go through the self-checkout line and avoid people because I don't like them.

What are you fussing about? I am leaving you alone. I'm just expressing my opinion. Why is it that everyone now sees a distasteful opinion as somebody trying to control them? Talk about paranoid...

[PaulConventionWV]

Sure, but free markets are pretty much democracies. Look at video games. I'd be perfectly happy with my GameCube's capabilities. But other gamers weren't, so the market developed new systems. I would be happier if they made new content available for the GameCube format, but the majority of the market moved on.

I'm not really sure what you're talking about with the GameCube thing. If 51% of the people like something, and 49% don't, that doesn't mean the stores go with the 51% because it is more profitable. They usually try to satisfy both. That isn't democracy. Democracy doesn't accomodate, it enforces the rule of the simple majority.

[moostraks]

What do you mean by at the expense of human beings? Technology ALWAYS saves time, and ALWAYS makes things more convenient, so eliminating the imaginary privacy you only had due to lack of technology, or decreasing job opportunities, is almost guaranteed, what examples are you thinking of where technology does not do one or both of them?

First explain what imaginary privacy exists due to a lack of technology. Is my privacy imaginary when I have hard copy books instead of kindle and buy with cash from private sellers? Is my privacy imaginary when I pay for cash for my groceries or goods at a farmers market or flea market with no cameras or "courtesy" cards? Technology does not always save time and convenience is in the eye of the beholder. Automatic dishwashers have been a bane of many a housewife's existence as an example of technology not saving time. My parents use theirs as a storage cabinet. The phone is a major inconvenience imo disrupting my household at the most inopportune moment and I refuse to answer mine, having finally come to the ownership of a magic jack for the purpose of providing a phone number to places such as doctors offices which demand a contact number.

[Sam I am]

I, personally, Love the self check-out at grocery stores. If there's a self-checkout option, I rarely bother with the cashier-based option.

[TrishW]

So the company does away with the cashier, for every dollar saved, the customer gets a penny. We now have more people out of work, and on welfare, so your tax dollars go up to pay for the penny you saved.

Looks to me like another way to transfer money to the 1%.

You cannot be for reducing welfare, and reducing jobs. It does not add up.

I wonder... who owns Penny's?

[moostraks]

If you don't want to be tracked temporarily while you do your shopping, then don't go shopping - as simple as that. You are not being coerced into the invasion of your own privacy, this is still a voluntary choice.

The level of this logic on a liberty forum would be amusing if it wasn't so sad. Don't shop? The future looks dark indeed when one should not point out the dangers in losing ones privacy for the sake of convenience but instead is told they should just not shop. Really? That is your honest solution? Just wait until you happen to piss off a neighbor and gain the attention of the government someday when this system is complete. How many laws do you think you break in an hour much less a day that can be brought crashing down upon you in a total surveillance grid system? So how does one feed or clothe their household once this great society with the wireless grid is complete?

I am not cowering in the corner, not now or ever.And I'll be darned if I'll have someone tell me to sit back and accept it. I will teach my family and discuss with others the inherrant dangers of the systems that are being employed and go out kicking and screaming being a market for those who realize that the old ways are the best ways for insuring the privacy and rights of the individual. The reason many of us come here and share with each other is so that we are not silenced and drown with the rest of society on the sinking ship of privacy thus allowing those in power to complete the circuit that gives them total control over any individual they site their targets on to make an example of as they get the rest to march in lockstep to whatever drum is beat.

[Seth]

So the company does away with the cashier, for every dollar saved, the customer gets a penny. We now have more people out of work, and on welfare, so your tax dollars go up to pay for the penny you saved.

Looks to me like another way to transfer money to the 1%.

You cannot be for reducing welfare, and reducing jobs. It does not add up.

I wonder... who owns Penny's?

Any time you can use technology to replace a human's job it means that person can perform some other productive task, which makes society more productive as a whole. Using your logic we should just go back to the cavemen days because at least then everyone had a job and there was no stinkin technology to replace human labor. We were much more prosperous back then.

[Sam I am]

It amazes me how so many people believe that they have a right to privacy in someone else's space.

What if you invited someone to your house, and they complained about any and all cameras that you had personally set up in your own house. Would you take their complaints as legitimate?

What If you had a camera mounted to the outside of your house? Would you appreciate someone telling you that you don't have the right to do that?

[moostraks]

It amazes me how so many people believe that they have a right to privacy in someone else's space.

What if you invited someone to your house, and they complained about any and all cameras that you had personally set up in your own house. Would you take their complaints as legitimate?

What If you had a camera mounted to the outside of your house? Would you appreciate someone telling you that you don't have the right to do that?

false analogy...big businesses lobby the government to destroy smaller businesses and private individuals that will operate in a manner that respects the privacy of the customer. The customer has every right to voice their complaints when a business solicits sales and a business has every right to ignore the customer or please the customer. They should not be allowed to use government might through bribery to destroy competition that refuses to operate in the manner they deem acceptable and ignore the will of the consumer while holding the market hostage.

[TrishW]

Any time you can use technology to replace a human's job it means that person can perform some other productive task, which makes society more productive as a whole. Using your logic we should just go back to the cavemen days because at least then everyone had a job and there was no stinkin technology to replace human labor. We were much more prosperous back then.


And using your logic... Most, if not all of us will soon become worthless eaters. Do you think they will keep the cute ones for pets?


If you disagree with my "faulty" logic, then perhaps you can make me a list of jobs, or as you say... productive tasks, that will not be able to be filled by artificial intelligence?

[TrishW]

Here is an article that will help express my thoughts.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/07/17/the-threat-of-automation-robots-threaten-american-jobs.html

[donnay]

Here is an article that will help express my thoughts.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/07/17/the-threat-of-automation-robots-threaten-american-jobs.html

The new-age Zeitgeist thinking is very troubling! We are one to two generations away from people being raise to not care one iota for humanity.

[Sam I am]

false analogy...big businesses lobby the government to destroy smaller businesses and private individuals that will operate in a manner that respects the privacy of the customer. The customer has every right to voice their complaints when a business solicits sales and a business has every right to ignore the customer or please the customer. They should not be allowed to use government might through bribery to destroy competition that refuses to operate in the manner they deem acceptable and ignore the will of the consumer while holding the market hostage.


I don't even know how to reply to this. Mostly because it's 100% off-topic and in no way addresses the post of mine that you've quoted

[moostraks]

I don't even know how to reply to this. Mostly because it's 100% off-topic and in no way addresses the post of mine that you've quoted

From what interpreted your point to be in your analogy, I think your analogy to businesses right to snoop (your somebody else's space) vs consumer right to privacy (People invited over who have no right to complain) is a false one. I also take offense to the issue of businesses that will employ this technology are pushing out the smaller market choices through their lobbying of the government on such think of the children measures that fall under safety standards: raw milk from local farms, handmade toys, and the like...There is not going to be a genuine market change but a small cartel of business owners will enforce change (as they have been doing to a greater and greater extent) and continue to destroy alternative options so compliance occurs.

If I was wrong in my interpretation of your previous post maybe you can enlighten me...

[Nickels]

First explain what imaginary privacy exists due to a lack of technology.


Before invention of binoculars, you can expect privacy when you are outdoors and see nobody around you.
Before invention of radios and recorders, you can expect that only the people in your sight can hear you.
Before invention of metal detectors, you can expect to carry metal weapons on your body without being detected, unless you were patted down.



Is my privacy imaginary when I have hard copy books instead of kindle and buy with cash from private sellers?


Possibly. As the path from buying to storing your book may have multiple opportunities of a spy.



Is my privacy imaginary when I pay for cash for my groceries or goods at a farmers market or flea market with no cameras or "courtesy" cards?


Yes. Because you cannot expect everybody around you to either not have cameras or not remember and tell others what you did. And if it's outdoors, your privacy is almost automatically gone.



Technology does not always save time and convenience is in the eye of the beholder.


It just does 99% of the time.



Automatic dishwashers have been a bane of many a housewife's existence as an example of technology not saving time.


Oh, I heard this one, just like the vaccuum cleaner, it doesn't "save time" it just "increases expectations", this is not untrue. Our expectations change, but facts are, dishwashers and vacuum cleaners get the same job done faster, or more job done in the same period of time.



My parents use theirs as a storage cabinet. The phone is a major inconvenience imo disrupting my household


If your parents are not using the washer, they are not wasting electricity or water on it, they can probably sell it for a few bucks.

You are not obligated to answer the phone, imagine the day you need it and don't have it.



at the most inopportune moment and I refuse to answer mine, having finally come to the ownership of a magic jack for the purpose of providing a phone number to places such as doctors offices which demand a contact number.

So magicjack is good or bad? It's a new option no less, isn't it?

[Nickels]

Any time you can use technology to replace a human's job it means that person can perform some other productive task, which makes society more productive as a whole. Using your logic we should just go back to the cavemen days because at least then everyone had a job and there was no stinkin technology to replace human labor. We were much more prosperous back then.

yep. Exactly. People who blindly complain "jobs!" are basically liberals and broken windowers, who don't look at the big picture, don't care where the money came from, and just think about themselves.

[Nickels]

The new-age Zeitgeist thinking is very troubling! We are one to two generations away from people being raise to not care one iota for humanity.

wanting people to be free of labor is "not caring about humanity"?

[Nickels]

And using your logic... Most, if not all of us will soon become worthless eaters. Do you think they will keep the cute ones for pets?

If you disagree with my "faulty" logic, then perhaps you can make me a list of jobs, or as you say... productive tasks, that will not be able to be filled by artificial intelligence?

Worthless eaters? Isn't that the goal of life? If not, you better be working a slave wage or volunteer, because "worthless eater" is somehow a crime.

But to answer you, artistic work and human touch are less likely to be replaced by robots. Not impossible, just less immediate. Some tasks are more repetitive and replaceable than others.

[moostraks]

Before invention of binoculars, you can expect privacy when you are outdoors and see nobody around you.
Before invention of radios and recorders, you can expect that only the people in your sight can hear you.
Before invention of metal detectors, you can expect to carry metal weapons on your body without being detected, unless you were patted down.



Possibly. As the path from buying to storing your book may have multiple opportunities of a spy.



Yes. Because you cannot expect everybody around you to either not have cameras or not remember and tell others what you did. And if it's outdoors, your privacy is almost automatically gone.



It just does 99% of the time.



Oh, I heard this one, just like the vaccuum cleaner, it doesn't "save time" it just "increases expectations", this is not untrue. Our expectations change, but facts are, dishwashers and vacuum cleaners get the same job done faster, or more job done in the same period of time.



If your parents are not using the washer, they are not wasting electricity or water on it, they can probably sell it for a few bucks.

You are not obligated to answer the phone, imagine the day you need it and don't have it.



So magicjack is good or bad? It's a new option no less, isn't it?

Imaginary:ADJECTIVE
1. in mind: existing only in the mind, not in reality
2. relating to imaginary number]s: relating to or containing imaginary numbers, or being the coefficient of the imaginary part in a complex number.
See also imaginary numbercomplex number

So I did not ever truly have any privacy? Not true imo...And the invasive technology is making it almost impossible to have privacy anywhere. The more the toys are made for people with a power/ control mindset the more they feel the need to use it upon unsuspecting others like perverse voyeurs. My home is my castle and I am entitled to the right of quiet enjoyment. I extend that view to my person and feel the extent to which the invasive technology is becoming mainstreamed is abusing the public right of ways so that one is now told that they should expect to be tracked or remain at home.

Technology may be 99% timesaver and convenience for you because that is how you view it, I do not with many items, therefore it is not/does not for me. You pay for all the toys which costs time and energy elsewhere. When they break you pay or work and pay to fix them. It is a lifestyle choice. Vacuum? I would rather get rid of the carpet and sweep and mop for example. The cost of vacuums in my family has exceeded $800 in the past 10 years. That is money worked for at a job to have a convenience of the vacuum cleaner. My home is over 100 years old and has never had a dishwasher to my knowledge unless it was a roll around model that has long since disappeared. I do not have to pre rinse and scrub so that I can dry my dishwasher dishes. I do not have to soak them because something that failed to be removed has hardened to a concrete consistency and then rewash them. They are done by hand correctly the first time. And there are no repair costs to be incurred.

If the parents wanted to have a huge hole to fix then they coould sell the dishwasher and deal with the aggravation of its removal or they can use some sense as they have and make it a storage cabinet. Their way works for them. Again different strokes and not everyone feels the need to lose a few bucks just to change an unnecessary item.

Magic jack is an unnecessary item foisted upon me by a society that demands I provide a contact number. So, I oblige and see it as a means of moving backwards as it works all on its little own time and I don't interact with it, and it costs me a fraction of what the monthly services were before when I was on TWC phone service. I have the ringer set so that it goes into voicemail and the other party feels satisfied it can contact while I no longer have my family life disrupted by nuisance calls. If I had my way it would be no phone service but just like any invasive technology that gains broad appeal people treat you as if you are worthy of suspicion because you don't want to partake in it. Much the same way we are now getting demands for additional contact numbers and received stares for not giving cell phone numbers. Strangers and businesses feel entitled because people willingly give them an inch and they want to take a mile.

Need the phone? Why? I can do well without one. There is no emergency in my location where a phone would be better than using my own means of transportation. You sound like the cable company that seems aghast that people could do something without a cable subscription. Why what will you do without cable? Uhhh...read???? Actually conversation that was had with a cable company.

[angelatc]

The new-age Zeitgeist thinking is very troubling! We are one to two generations away from people being raise to not care one iota for humanity.

Personally, I'm about 10 minutes from it.

[Nickels]

Imaginary:ADJECTIVE
1. in mind: existing only in the mind, not in reality
2. relating to imaginary number]s: relating to or containing imaginary numbers, or being the coefficient of the imaginary part in a complex number.
See also imaginary numbercomplex number

So I did not ever truly have any privacy?


You don't understand. Privacy is relative and based on expectations.



Not true imo...And the invasive technology is making it almost impossible to have privacy anywhere.


Ok, so what was your question?



The more the toys are made for people with a power/ control mindset the more they feel the need to use it upon unsuspecting others like perverse voyeurs. My home is my castle and I am entitled to the right of quiet enjoyment.


Privacy is not quiet enjoyment. Quiet enjoyment pertains to disruption.



I extend that view to my person


You got it backwards. Your house is the extension of you, not vice versa.



and feel the extent to which the invasive technology is becoming mainstreamed is abusing the public right of ways so that one is now told that they should expect to be tracked or remain at home.


Yes, because you cannot stop a person from using technology.



Technology may be 99% timesaver and convenience for you because that is how you view it, I do not with many items, therefore it is not/does not for me.


You are free to not use them.



You pay for all the toys which costs time and energy elsewhere. When they break you pay or work and pay to fix them. It is a lifestyle choice. Vacuum? I would rather get rid of the carpet and sweep and mop for example.


I pay for what is worth it to me, what the hell is your point?



The cost of vacuums in my family has exceeded $800 in the past 10 years.


Just the machine ?or including electicity? You must have a big house or a nice vaccum, because I used the same $100 vacuum for 11 years.



That is money worked for at a job to have a convenience of the vacuum cleaner.


Ok, so don't have it. What is your complaint?



My home is over 100 years old and has never had a dishwasher to my knowledge unless it was a roll around model that has long since disappeared. I do not have to pre rinse and scrub so that I can dry my dishwasher dishes. I do not have to soak them because something that failed to be removed has hardened to a concrete consistency and then rewash them. They are done by hand correctly the first time. And there are no repair costs to be incurred.


you can get a job being a dishwasher then.




If the parents wanted to have a huge hole to fix then they coould sell the dishwasher and deal with the aggravation of its removal or they can use some sense as they have and make it a storage cabinet. Their way works for them. Again different strokes and not everyone feels the need to lose a few bucks just to change an unnecessary item.

Magic jack is an unnecessary item foisted upon me by a society that demands I provide a contact number.


Why can't you give them a fake number? Why do you need to do business with them?



So, I oblige and see it as a means of moving backwards as it works all on its little own time and I don't interact with it, and it costs me a fraction of what the monthly services were before when I was on TWC phone service. I have the ringer set so that it goes into voicemail and the other party feels satisfied it can contact while I no longer have my family life disrupted by nuisance calls. If I had my way it would be no phone service but just like any invasive technology that gains broad appeal people treat you as if you are worthy of suspicion because you don't want to partake in it.


Explain to me, why you cannot have your way. Who is forcing you to have a phone in a way that is not worth it? Whoever demands you provide a phone number, can you refuse to do business with them?



Much the same way we are now getting demands for additional contact numbers and received stares for not giving cell phone numbers. Strangers and businesses feel entitled because people willingly give them an inch and they want to take a mile.


So you don't want them to have the convenience, I get it now. You enjoy being left alone.



Need the phone? Why? I can do well without one. There is no emergency in my location where a phone would be better than using my own means of transportation.


Ok, good for you. Then don't have one. I hope your car never breaks down or needs a towing, don't go knocking on your neighbor's door to borrow their phone there! Won't kill you, but don't tell me that's not convenience.



You sound like the cable company that seems aghast that people could do something without a cable subscription. Why what will you do without cable? Uhhh...read???? Actually conversation that was had with a cable company.

Neither phone nor cable are necessities. I recognize that. I just never heard somebody complain about a phone like this, if you can live without it, dont have one. I dont think it would be very convenient for me to live without my phone, so I have one and it's worth it for me. I can live fine without cable, some even say they can live without electricity.

[angelatc]

I'm not really sure what you're talking about with the GameCube thing. If 51% of the people like something, and 49% don't, that doesn't mean the stores go with the 51% because it is more profitable. They usually try to satisfy both. That isn't democracy. Democracy doesn't accomodate, it enforces the rule of the simple majority.

That's what I'm saying. But in the case of the GameCube, there's not enough demand to create a profitable market. At that point, I could either bitch that life wasn't fair, or I could buy a Wii. I eventually went with the latter.

[specsaregood]

That's what I'm saying. But in the case of the GameCube, there's not enough demand to create a profitable market. At that point, I could either bitch that life wasn't fair, or I could buy a Wii. I eventually went with the latter.

You ever played Super Mario "The Lost Levels"? Its available for download in their online store thing. Quite possibly the most difficult video game ever created, is awesome. they didn't sell it in the US because it was deemed too difficult.

[Wesker1982]

"Destroyed a thousand times, it has risen a thousand times out of its own ashes as hardy and vigorous as ever..."

The Curse of Machinery (http://www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/#0.1_L8)

[Nickels]

Magic jack is an unnecessary item foisted upon me by a society that demands I provide a contact number. So, I oblige and see it as a means of moving backwards as it works all on its little own time and I don't interact with it, and it costs me a fraction of what the monthly services were before when I was on TWC phone service. I have the ringer set so that it goes into voicemail and the other party feels satisfied it can contact while I no longer have my family life disrupted by nuisance calls. If I had my way it would be no phone service but just like any invasive technology that gains broad appeal people treat you as if you are worthy of suspicion because you don't want to partake in it. Much the same way we are now getting demands for additional contact numbers and received stares for not giving cell phone numbers. Strangers and businesses feel entitled because people willingly give them an inch and they want to take a mile.

Need the phone? Why? I can do well without one. There is no emergency in my location where a phone would be better than using my own means of transportation. You sound like the cable company that seems aghast that people could do something without a cable subscription. Why what will you do without cable? Uhhh...read???? Actually conversation that was had with a cable company.

did you forget that you only claim you don't need a phone because you have something called a car, and a car costs more than a phone?
Did you forget that people had phones before they had cars?
did you forget that magic jack is an advanced phone, just as answering machines are, that allow you to answer as you please, and avoid as you please?
If you can outrun a phone call on foot, more power to you, I still don't see how a phone has NOT made your life more convenient.
Whatever other technology you want to complain about, always remember you almost always have a choice to not use them, so the fact it's an additional option is itself convenience. Not knowing how to use something to your advantage is not the same as blaming them for causing you inconvenience.

[moostraks]

You don't understand. Privacy is relative and based on expectations.



Ok, so what was your question?



Privacy is not quiet enjoyment. Quiet enjoyment pertains to disruption.



You got it backwards. Your house is the extension of you, not vice versa.



Yes, because you cannot stop a person from using technology.



You are free to not use them.



I pay for what is worth it to me, what the hell is your point?



Just the machine ?or including electicity? You must have a big house or a nice vaccum, because I used the same $100 vacuum for 11 years.



Ok, so don't have it. What is your complaint?



you can get a job being a dishwasher then.




Why can't you give them a fake number? Why do you need to do business with them?



Explain to me, why you cannot have your way. Who is forcing you to have a phone in a way that is not worth it? Whoever demands you provide a phone number, can you refuse to do business with them?



So you don't want them to have the convenience, I get it now. You enjoy being left alone.



Ok, good for you. Then don't have one. I hope your car never breaks down or needs a towing, don't go knocking on your neighbor's door to borrow their phone there! Won't kill you, but don't tell me that's not convenience.



Neither phone nor cable are necessities. I recognize that. I just never heard somebody complain about a phone like this, if you can live without it, dont have one. I dont think it would be very convenient for me to live without my phone, so I have one and it's worth it for me. I can live fine without cable, some even say they can live without electricity.

1-I detest when people parse posts.
2-I detest when people redefine words
3-privacy specifically:
freedom from attention of others: freedom from the observation, intrusion, or attention of others http://www.bing.com/Dictionary/search?q=define+privacy&qpvt=define+privacy&FORM=DTPDIA
3-my quiet enjoyment involves not being spied on by people who feel entitled to invade my "space" and peep or listen in on my goings on. I am not at peace when I am on eggshells. Much the same way guests should be given a bed that is just hard enough to remind them to go home so the homeowner can have the privacy of their household returned in a timely fashion.
3-I have a job-parent, teacher, homemaker which involves multifarious sub categories. So thanks for tlling me to become a dishwasher. Weren't you they same poster that suggested a job to someone else? It is quite presumptious and an ignorant argument to state that because one disagrees with you they should seek employment as <insert job here>
4-My question? You are parsing poorly
5-Complaint? Try observation that your position does not apply that 99% of technology is an improvement on the human condition.
6-Fake phone number for pediatrician would get a visit from social services. they request a number and use it to give courtesy calls for appointments. And no you cannot get away with not giving a contact number with various services. Many services demand a working contact number to which foisting it upon family members is unfair. I don't have to explain to you which services, but it was necessary.
7-I live in town and can walk to most places necessary. A broke down car will be fixed at home. A tow truck can be called from the payphone on the square if that off chance in a million were necessary.
8-Social services will make a case against folks based upon this presumed "need" for certain modern conveniences. All are not free to chose to run their household as they see fit....

[moostraks]

did you forget that you only claim you don't need a phone because you have something called a car, and a car costs more than a phone?
Did you forget that people had phones before they had cars?
did you forget that magic jack is an advanced phone, just as answering machines are, that allow you to answer as you please, and avoid as you please?
If you can outrun a phone call on foot, more power to you, I still don't see how a phone has NOT made your life more convenient.
Whatever other technology you want to complain about, always remember you almost always have a choice to not use them, so the fact it's an additional option is itself convenience. Not knowing how to use something to your advantage is not the same as blaming them for causing you inconvenience.

I didn't forget anything. I stated all advancements are not a positive improvement.Most are not balanced against the cost in intial outgo, repair, and loss of privacy/peacefulness. I prefer my bicycle to the car, less maintenance, but real hassle when the whole family goes somewhere. So the car, like the magicjack is a handy tool. If my car starts to spy on me then I will be rid of it for most of what it is used for now, which is short intown uses. See the thread here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?383717-Drivers-Could-Be-Tracked-By-GPS-Taxed-Per-Mile-Driven You are the one making a 99% argument. Re the phone:You can't see it because you like the phone. I see it has cost me $1440 for the past 4 years for an instrument that I do not want and do not like to answer. I have now made that about $150 option for 6 or 7 years I don't recall which, and don't raise eyebrows with folks that think they are entitled to ring me up at their convenience.

In a free world the option would exist. We do not live in a free world. Something as petty as having cable can and has been used in family court to try to prove the unfitness of a family that dearly loves their children. Dissenters are not tolerated, especially when they have children. How many laws have you broken today for which a nosey neighbor might want to rid the neighborhood of you? Trust me, you might think you have nothing to fear, but rare is the person who hasn't broken some law no matter how unintentional for which their life can be made miserable by pissing off the wrong person. I m the type that has learned not to give any more ammo to those who might have ulterior motives. Learned it the hard way....

[Nickels]

I didn't forget anything. I stated all advancements are not a positive improvement.Most are not balanced against the cost in intial outgo, repair, and loss of privacy/peacefulness. I prefer my bicycle to the car, less maintenance, but real hassle when the whole family goes somewhere. So the car, like the magicjack is a handy tool. If my car starts to spy on me then I will be rid of it for most of what it is used for now, which is short intown uses. See the thread here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?383717-Drivers-Could-Be-Tracked-By-GPS-Taxed-Per-Mile-Driven You are the one making a 99% argument. Re the phone:You can't see it because you like the phone. I see it has cost me $1440 for the past 4 years for an instrument that I do not want and do not like to answer.


No, I do see the cost. I just find it worth it. Do you bicycle your kids to doctors? I hope you never need to get them to an ER quick. You are free to depend on paid phones, I hope they'll always work and you always have coins on you.



I have now made that about $150 option for 6 or 7 years I don't recall which, and don't raise eyebrows with folks that think they are entitled to ring me up at their convenience.

In a free world the option would exist. We do not live in a free world. Something as petty as having cable can and has been used in family court to try to prove the unfitness of a family that dearly loves their children. Dissenters are not tolerated, especially when they have children.


For somebody who knows so much about math and benefits you sure didn't plan out the children.



How many laws have you broken today for which a nosey neighbor might want to rid the neighborhood of you? Trust me, you might think you have nothing to fear, but rare is the person who hasn't broken some law no matter how unintentional for which their life can be made miserable by pissing off the wrong person. I m the type that has learned not to give any more ammo to those who might have ulterior motives. Learned it the hard way....

my neighbors are my best friends, I can see why you are full of complaints. you blame everything wrong with your life on somebody else, that's why you can't trust your neighbors and avoid phone calls. You might be praying that one day my neighbors will betray me and i'll pay the ultimate price for trusting them, but it hasn't happened yet.

[Nickels]

And no you cannot get away with not giving a contact number with various services. Many services demand a working contact number to which foisting it upon family members is unfair. I don't have to explain to you which services, but it was necessary.

I can't see what services are more necessary that you can't see the benefit of having a phone for....oh wait, you do. You already know its unfair to foist on your family members.

[moostraks]

No, I do see the cost. I just find it worth it. Do you bicycle your kids to doctors? I hope you never need to get them to an ER quick. You are free to depend on paid phones, I hope they'll always work and you always have coins on you.



For somebody who knows so much about math and benefits you sure didn't plan out the children.



my neighbors are my best friends, I can see why you are full of complaints. you blame everything wrong with your life on somebody else, that's why you can't trust your neighbors and avoid phone calls. You might be praying that one day my neighbors will betray me and i'll pay the ultimate price for trusting them, but it hasn't happened yet.

1-Have a car. All technolgical "improvement" is not bad just much of the current array of technology is invasive.
2-I would have conis since they are near my home. Since I live in town most things are within walking distance, yes that includes the hospital. So were the car to break down on a day with an medical emergency I would most likely not be inconvenienced.
3-Didn't plan out children? Says you? My children are a wonderful asset to my life. I don't do math the way you are doing it
4-I don't blame everything wrong in my life on somebody else. Do you get your jollies by putting down others? I have had some bad neighbors before and learned to keep to myself. Current home is great and so are the neighbors. I don't pray for anyone to go through what we went through, but sometimes life has a way of biting those who are most sure of themselves squarely in the keister to keep them on their toes.

[moostraks]

I can't see what services are more necessary that you can't see the benefit of having a phone for....oh wait, you do. You already know its unfair to foist on your family members.
snarky post is snarky

[Nickels]

1-Have a car. All technolgical "improvement" is not bad just much of the current array of technology is invasive.


Thanks for finally admiting that.



2-I would have conis since they are near my home. Since I live in town most things are within walking distance, yes that includes the hospital. So were the car to break down on a day with an medical emergency I would most likely not be inconvenienced.


Funny that you don't consider everything being in walking distance to be 'invasive' and appreciate the convenience.



3-Didn't plan out children? Says you? My children are a wonderful asset to my life. I don't do math the way you are doing it


Oh really, can you tell me how much they're worth? You seem to be good at telling me what every little thing costs.



4-I don't blame everything wrong in my life on somebody else. Do you get your jollies by putting down others? I have had some bad neighbors before and learned to keep to myself. Current home is great and so are the neighbors. I don't pray for anyone to go through what we went through, but sometimes life has a way of biting those who are most sure of themselves squarely in the keister to keep them on their toes.

alright.

[moostraks]

Thanks for finally admiting that.



Funny that you don't consider everything being in walking distance to be 'invasive' and appreciate the convenience.



Oh really, can you tell me how much they're worth? You seem to be good at telling me what every little thing costs.



alright.

you have a problem...

[donnay]

Personally, I'm about 10 minutes from it.

How sad for you.